1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
5 If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin-- 7 because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.
8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.
11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13 Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. 14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.
A Lesson from Dr. Seuss
Romans 6:1-14
Sermon
by King Duncan
“Congratulations, today’s your day. You’re off to great places. You’re off and away. You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself any direction you choose.” Those rhythmic words of advice come from the delightful little book by Dr. Seuss titled Oh, the Places You’ll Go! (1)
“You’re on your own,” he continues. “And you know what you know. And YOU are the one who’ll decide where to go.”
It’s up to us, says Dr. Seuss. The world is ours and we are free to choose what kind of life we will have. He even provides a warning: “You’ll look up and down streets. Look’em over with care. About some you will say, ‘I don’t choose to go there.’” With your head full of brains and your shoes full of feet, you’re too smart to go down a not-so-good street.”
I wish that were true, don’t you? I wish we only went places our brains told us to go that we always made rational choices.
A. Philip Parham tells about a minister who asked a person he was counseling if he had any trouble making decisions. The man answered, “Well, yes and no.”
Parham notes that the word intelligence comes from two words inter, meaning “between,” and legere, meaning “to choose.” An intelligent person is one who has learned to choose between good and evil, truth and falsehood, love and hate, gentleness and cruelty, humility and arrogance, and life and death. (2)
In other words, “You’ll look up and down streets. Look’em over with care. About some you will say, ‘I don’t choose to go there.’” As one preacher in the Southern U.S says, “God always votes yes, the devil votes no, and your vote decides the election.”
Life is about choices. That’s where we want to begin today.
Professional speaker Phillip Wexler notes that the human being is the only creature on earth that is not the prisoner of its programming, but is the master of it. Birds are programmed to fly south in the winter. They don’t suddenly decide that because of the bad economy they had better stay home this year. Beavers build dams. Fish swim in schools. Only humans decide to build a dam or to go back to school. We have the power to decide. That doesn’t mean, of course, that we always make good decisions.
Some of you will remember an episode of Seinfeld in which George Costanza is frustrated because every decision he makes turns out to be wrong. Jerry says, “Here’s your chance to do the opposite. If every instinct you have is wrong, then the opposite would have to be right.”
George realizes that Jerry is on to something. If he would act and react completely opposite of his normal actions and reactions, he might have better results. George makes a decision to alter his behavior. “Yes! I will do the opposite!” he declares.
It turns out that Jerry was right. Whenever George does the opposite of his normal reactions, the situation always turns out in his favor. (3)
You really have to have a perverse view of the world to make such an approach to life work for you, but that is why the comedy on Seinfeld worked.
And yet, many of us will have to confess that there is something within us that invariably draws us toward making bad choices.
A customer in a bakery was observed carefully examining all the rich-looking pastries displayed on trays in the glass cases.
A clerk approached him and asked, “What would you like?”
The customer answered, “I’d like that chocolate-covered, cream-filled doughnut, that jelly-filled doughnut and that cheese Danish.”
Then with a sigh he added, “But I’ll take an oat-bran muffin.”
Why is it that we are drawn to that which is bad for us especially when we know that making bad choices can sometimes be disastrous?
When Pompeii was being excavated, they found a woman’s body. Her body had been preserved by the ashes from Mount Vesuvius as it swept over the city. This woman’s feet were turned toward the city gate, toward safety but her face was turned backward. She was looking back toward something that was just beyond her outstretched hands. The archeologists wondered what she was looking for. As they dug, they found a bag of pearls. Maybe she dropped this bag of pearls as she ran for her life. Maybe someone else dropped them, and this lady saw the chance for instant wealth. But, one way or another, with her life on the line, she thought it was worthwhile to stop and pick up some pearls. She turned to pick them up and the volcanic ash swept over her. (4)
What a terrible choice. It was a very human thing to do to reach out for the bag of pearls, but it cost her her life.
There are many choices that people make that end up costing them their lives, or their families, or their health, or their peace of mind. Anything that causes you to hurt yourself or to hurt someone else is going to be a bad choice.
Some of you will remember the story of a teenage girl who was out on a date one night. Her boyfriend suggested they go to a party where there was going to be alcohol and drugs and all kinds of illicit activity.
This particularly responsible young woman said, “No, I’m not going to do that. And if you’re going to do that, you can take me home.”
Her boyfriend said, “What’s the matter? Are you afraid your Daddy will hurt you?”
She said, “No, I’m afraid that I will hurt my Daddy.”
She knew that what her boyfriend was suggesting was a bad choice. “You’ll look up and down streets. Look ’em over with care. About some you will say, ‘I don’t choose to go there.’”
The Bible says that we are drawn to bad choices because of our sinful nature. In today’s lesson from the Epistle, St. Paul writes, “When you were slaves to sin, you were free from the control of righteousness. What benefit did you reap at that time from the things you are now ashamed of? Those things result in death! But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (20-23).
St. Paul contrasts people who are enslaved to sin and those who are servants of God. We need to understand what he is saying.
First of all, let’s acknowledge that we are sinners. Even the best of us are sinners.
W. E. Sangster is generally regarded as one to the ten greatest preachers of the twentieth century, but he knew he was a sinner. In a painfully honest look at his own life, W. E. Sangster wrote in his journal that he had many shortcomings in his spiritual life. He confessed that he was sometimes irritable and easily put out. He was impatient with his wife and children. He acknowledged that most of his study had been crudely ambitious; that he wanted degrees more than knowledge and praise rather than equipment for service.
Even in his preaching he feared that he was more often wondering what the people thought of him, than what they thought about Christ and His word.
He said he had long felt in a vague way, that something was hindering the effectiveness of his ministry and he had concluded that the “something” was his failure in living the truly Christian life. It troubled him that the girl who had lived as a maid in his house for more than three years had not felt drawn to the Christian life because of him. He said he found slight envies in his heart at the greater success of other young ministers. He felt vaguely jealous when they attracted more notice than he did. (5)
You get the idea. W. E. Sangster was one of the great Christian leaders of his time, but he knew deep in his heart that he was not everything that Christ meant for him to be. He was a sinner, just as you and I are sinners. He made bad choices just as you and I make bad choices. He needed God’s help daily just as you and I need God’s help daily.
W. E. Sangster was a sinner, yet he still made better choices than perhaps ninety-nine per cent of humanity. That is because he not only knew of God’s grace, he knew of God’s power to help us choose rightly. W.E. Sangster chose to be a servant of God rather than a slave to sin.
Please don’t let the first-century imagery of being a slave or a servant get in the way of your understanding. We could use the imagery that Christ used of “taking up his yoke” (Mt 11:29), and we would be on the same road.
Let’s use another example. Thirty years ago a psychologist named William Glasser wrote a very helpful book titled, Positive Addiction. Think about that term for a moment, positive addiction. Usually when we think of addiction we think in negative terms drugs, alcohol, online p*rn, violent video games anything we can become so obsessed with that it will be destructive to us mentally, physically or spiritually. We know how many lives have been damaged by negative addictions.
Glasser noted that there are some activities, however, that we can become addicted to that will result in positive benefits for ourselves and others. One of the most obvious is physical exercise. Glasser came to understand the power of positive addiction from his experience as a runner. Running or almost any physical exercise can become addictive. Not only can you get to the point where you actually look forward to slogging down the street in the wind and the cold, but you are irritable and disoriented when something interferes with your daily run. It becomes an addiction a positive addiction. On the other hand, the benefits of a positive addiction can be amazing. Weight loss, decline in blood pressure, regulation of blood sugar, improvement in your cardio-vascular condition, etc. the list of possible health benefits is amazing.
You can become addicted to all kinds of positive activities. Glasser listed such things as gardening, juggling, swinging a bat, bathing, creative but non-critical writing, and knitting. Just about anything can become a positive addiction if it is something you do religiously, if it benefits you and those around you, and if it does not cause you to neglect other positive activities you ought to be involved in. (6)
Positive addiction is like being a servant of God. It means daily making choices that are in keeping with God’s will for wholeness and health. It means choosing daily, with God’s help, attitudes and actions that bring God glory.
Olympic swim coach Daniel F. Chambliss put it like this: “Great accomplishments, we often assume, require heroic motivation: an intense desire to be the best, an inner strength beyond all measure, some special love of school, of family, of country. Some one of these must, we think, drive the superlative athlete . . . In fact,” he says, “world class athletes get to the top level by making a thousand little decisions every morning and night. If you make the right choice on each of these decide to get up and go to practice, decide to work hard today, decide to volunteer to do an extra event to help your team then others will say you ‘have’ dedication. But it is only the doing of those little things, all taken together, that makes that dedication. Great [athletes] aren’t made in the long run; they are made every day.” (7)
Positive addiction. Servants of God. Or, as Dr. Seuss says, “You’ll look up and down streets. Look ’em over with care. About some you will say, ‘I don’t choose to go there.’ With your head full of brains and your shoes full of feet, you’re too smart to go down a not-so-good street.” Life consists of making choices. The Bible says that we are drawn to bad choices because of our sinful nature. But it doesn’t have to be that way. We can train ourselves, by God’s grace, to daily make good choices.
Pastor Tommy Barnett tells a revealing story of an encounter he had with singer Elvis Presley many years ago. Elvis was in the congregation at a church where Barnett was preaching. Elvis seemed moved by the sermon, and wanted to talk to Barnett afterwards. Elvis knew that he needed to repent of his lifestyle and return to his Christian faith. But the allure of show business was so strong that he felt like he had no choice but to keep going in the same direction. With tears rolling down his face, Elvis asked, “. . . what if I renounce show business and find that serving God won’t bring joy to my heart?” (8) Sounds like a sensible question, doesn’t it? Of course, we all know what show business did to this talented man. Elvis had it all but became a poster child for, and ultimately a victim of, bad choices.
Choosing Christ invariably helps us make better choices. That’s one reason the Christian faith has stood the test of time. When people give their lives to Christ they become better parents, they become better citizens, they live happier, more fulfilled lives. We all know it’s true.
But let me say this. It happens only if you make your faith the most important part of your lives. It works only if you take your faith seriously. I’m not being judgmental here. Studies show that people who only show up at church occasionally who have only a casual relationship with God are as clueless as everyone else about what it takes to have a fulfilling life. They make the same bad choices, they have the same emptiness, as the world outside. Only when Christ becomes a real presence in our lives do the benefits of faith show themselves. The words “servants of God” may rub us the wrong way, but they emphasize the completeness of the commitment that is required.
The choice is put squarely to us by St. Paul. He writes, “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” The choice couldn’t be any plainer than that. Or, as Dr. Seuss puts it, “Congratulations, today’s your day. You’re off to great places. You’re off and away. You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself any direction you choose.” With God’s help, you can!
1. Random House (January 22, 1990).
2. Letting God: Christian Meditations for Recovering Persons (Harper San Francisco, 1987).
3. http://www.kentcrockett.blogspot.com/
4. John Gerike, http://www.goodshepherdlutheran.com/files/sermons/2006/sermon060827.pdf.
5. Gordon MacDonald, Restoring Your Spiritual Passion (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1986).
6. (Harper & Row, 1976).
7. W. B. Freeman, The Little Book of Olympic Inspiration (Tulsa: Trade Life, 1996, p. 139).
8. Tommy Barnett, Adventure Yourself (Lake Mary, FL.: Creation House, 2000), p. 126.
ChristianGlobe Networks, Inc., Dynamic Preaching Second Quarter 2011 Sermons, by King Duncan
The Result: Our Participation with Christ (6:1–8:39): In Romans 1–5 we learn that human beings have a sin problem and that God has provided a solution through Jesus Christ. In Romans 6–8 we see how our participation with Christ reshapes the way we now live. Once we were enslaved to sin, but now we are servants of God. We’re no longer under the law but are free to walk in the new way of the Spirit. We have been given new life, a new family, and a glorious future. Nothing can separate us from God’s love.
Some might conclude fr…
The Baker Bible Handbook by , Baker Publishing Group, 2016
1 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
5 If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. 6 For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin-- 7 because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.
8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.
11 In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. 13 Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. 14 For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace.
6:1–8:39 Review · The reality of justification by faith in the life of the Christian:In the second main section of the letter, Paul explains the reality of God’s saving righteousness in the life of the Christian (6:1–8:39). Believers in Jesus Christ cannot possibly trivialize sin, since they have been freed from the slavery of sin (6:1–23). There has been a fundamental change from tolerating sin to being in the Spirit and living according to the will of God (7:1–8:17). While believers suffer in the present world, they suffer in hope (8:18–30), assured of their ultimate triumph on account of the love of God (8:31–39).
6:1–23 Review · The new life of true righteousness:Paul argues that while sin has not yet been eliminated as a present reality, believers in Christ who have been declared righteous do not regard sin as something insignificant, because they have understood the implications of their conversion. When they came to faith they were united with Christ, who died because of sin and who was raised from the dead (6:1–14). The fact that believers are “not under the law but under grace” does not mean they tolerate sin. Rather, they have been freed from the slavery of sin, with the result that they are consistently devoted to righteousness and holy living (6:15–23).
6:1–14 · In 6:1 Paul repeats the sacrilegious proposition of his Jewish dialogue partner (3:8), but as a question put forward by the justified sinner of 3:21–5:21. The suggestion that believers might continue to sin in order that grace may increase may have been an objection to Paul’s theology voiced by Jews or by Jewish Christians. The objection is based on a false inference—namely, that Paul’s teaching regarding the justification of sinners by God’s grace implies that an increase in sin (which God forgives) leads to an increase in grace (God can forgive more sins). The question of the reality of God’s saving grace in real life is of the highest importance for Christian believers. This is the reason why Paul raises this question, and why he answers it in the course of chapters 6–8, addressing Christians directly (not indirectly through a conversation with a dialogue partner). In 6:2 Paul protests against the suggestion that the reality of God’s righteousness saving sinners by grace encourages people to go on sinning (“By no means!”). He answers the question of verse 1 with the assertion that believers in Jesus Christ, who died for sinners, will not continue to live in sin because they have “died to sin”—and dead people cannot sin.
In 6:3–10 Paul gives a theological explanation; in 6:11–14 he gives an ethical explanation. He begins in 6:3 with a reminder of a theological truth he expects the Roman Christians to know already. Faith in Christ establishes a union with Christ with respect to his death. While English versions translate the verb in verse 3 as “baptize,” for speakers of the Greek language the term baptizō does not mean “baptize”—i.e., “to use water in a rite for the purpose of ... establishing a relationship with God”—but “to put or go under water,” as it is used for a ship that sinks, for a flooded city, or metaphorically for people who are immersed in debt (see BDAG, 164). Paul asserts that sinners who have come to faith were “immersed into” the Messiah Jesus, which means that they share his fate. (At the same time, believers would have been reminded by Paul’s formulation of their immersion in water when they had come to faith in Jesus and became members of the congregation of believers.) Jesus is a representative figure—the Messiah, who is the second Adam and whose obedience affects those who belong to him (5:12–21). Since Jesus died on the cross—the place where God was graciously present to atone for their sins—their immersion into Jesus Christ is an immersion into his death. Faith in Christ therefore establishes a union with Jesus the Messiah that causes the believer’s participation in his death (and resurrection, 6:5). If Paul’s readers understood the apostle to refer to baptism, he would want to clarify that the union with Christ does not become a reality through water baptism understood as a purely ceremonial event but through faith in Jesus as the crucified Messiah and Savior (Rom. 1:16–17; 3:22, 25–28, 30; 4:5, 9, 12; 5:1). Participation in the death of Jesus the Messiah means participation in his burial (6:4). Paul mentions burial because it confirms that death has occurred (1Cor. 15:3–4).
Paul goes on to argue that since faith in Jesus Christ establishes a union with his death, it likewise establishes a union with his resurrection. As Jesus was raised from the dead through the glorious power of God the Father, so believers participate in his resurrection, which enables them to live a new life. And this is the reason why they cannot sin deliberately or live carelessly. The newness of the life of the Christian believers is the new life of the Spirit (7:6), the life of the new creation (2Cor. 5:17; Gal. 6:15), the life of the new humanity (Eph. 2:15). Verse 5 explains: believers are united not only with Jesus’s death but also with Jesus’s resurrection. While the verse speaks of the believer’s future resurrection, Paul asserts that believers are enabled to live a new life on account of the power of God, which was manifested in Jesus’s resurrection and is at work in their lives by virtue of their union with Christ.
Paul restates in 6:6–10 what he said in verses 3–5, explaining why Christians cannot continue sinning. Since union with Christ is a union with his death, it is a union with Jesus’s crucifixion (6:6). Since Jesus died on the cross for the sins of Adam’s descendants (“our old self”), believers have been crucified with Christ by virtue of their union with the second Adam. The purpose of Jesus’s death and the purpose of the believer’s union with him is the destruction of the “body ruled by sin,” the liberation from the power of sin that has enslaved Adam’s descendants (1:18–3:20). Verse 7 explains why believers cannot be slaves to sin: dead people are no longer controlled by the power of sin, which means that believers who have been identified with Jesus’s death and who died when Jesus died have been freed from the enslaving power of sin and its consequence, which is God’s condemnation. This does not mean that Christians can no longer sin. We are united with Jesus’s death and resurrection, but the resurrection of our body is still in the future. Believers have been freed from sin and its consequences, but they are not yet free from temptation, or from the possibility of sinning, or from the reality of committing sins. But sinning is not the state of affairs that believers consider to be normal and acceptable. In verses 8–10 Paul explains what the believer’s union with Jesus’s resurrection means. As they are incorporated into Christ’s death, they will live with him in the future of God’s ultimate triumph over death (6:8). The reason is that Christ, whom God raised from the dead, will not die a second time (6:9), which means that those who are united with Christ’s death will not die a second time either. Death no longer has any power over Jesus, and thus death no longer has power over believers, as their death has already taken place (on the cross). Verse 10 explains why the power of death has been canceled: when Jesus died, he “died to sin”—that is, to break the power of sin, which owns sinners by imposing the death sentence (5:21; 7:9–11, 15–20). As the power of sin has been broken once for all, the risen Christ lives for the glory of God.
In 6:11–14 Paul explains his assertion in 6:2, that believers have died to sin and thus cannot go on sinning, with regard to the behavior of Christians in everyday life. Believers who are incorporated into Christ must consider themselves dead to sin and thus ready and enabled to live for the glory of God (6:11). This is possible as a result of the reality of being “in Christ Jesus.” It is as the result of their union with Christ that they participate in the liberation from the power of sin through Jesus Christ and in the newness of life he lives for the glory of God. They must recognize that they are no longer controlled by sin, which always results in death. Now God is their master. The implications of this new reality are spelled out in verses 11–12. Believers must not allow sin and desire for sin to take over again. Paul acknowledges that sin can be tempting, that both temptations and acts of sin continue to be possibilities for believers, and that both sin and temptations are not ideas but realities that affect the person of the believer (and his body, which continues to be mortal, i.e., weak and finite). This is why Paul formulates an imperative—since Christ triumphed over sin and death, believers in Christ must not allow themselves to come under the enslaving power of sin again, as their union with Christ’s resurrection enables them to resist sinful desires. Since sins are committed by the members of the human body, Paul challenges the believers not to allow their bodies to promote wickedness (6:13). They must realize that they have been promoted from death to life, that they placed themselves at the disposal of God, and that they must use their bodies to promote righteousness. Paul promises that sin will no longer rule over the believers (6:14). Since Christ has broken the power of sin, those who are united with him cannot be controlled by sin (and its consequence, which is death). Sin can no longer be their lord, because they belong to the Lord Jesus Christ. Believers in Jesus Christ are “not under law”—they are not exposed to the death sentence of the Mosaic law, which condemns sinners. Rather, they are “under grace”—their life in the present and their life in the future are determined by the grace of God, who has forgiven their sins through Jesus Christ.
The Baker Illustrated Bible Commentary by Gary M. Burge, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Big Idea: In chapter6 Paul presents another blessing: new dominion. The first Adam forfeited his dominion over the earth. But Christ, the last Adam, inaugurated a new age and new covenant, restoring the lost dominion. Believers enter that new dominion by uniting with Christ’s death and resurrection: they become dead to sin and alive to God.
Understanding the Text
While Romans 3:21–5:21 developed the theme of justification, Romans 6:1–8:16 is devoted to the topic of sanctification.1On the one hand, justification and sanctification are to be distinguished, as shown in table 1. On the other hand, justification and sanctification should not be completely separated, since the latter flows out of the former, as 6:1–14 demonstrates.
The Distinction between Justification and Sanctification:
Juridical: declared righteous vs. Moral: made righteous
Instantaneous decision vs. Lifelong growth
Imputed righteousness: the Christian’s standing/position before God vs. Imparted righteousness: the Christian’s walk/practice before God
Indicative mood: you are justified vs. Imperative mood: act like it
Union with Christ in his past death/resurrection vs. Communion with Christ in the present
Romans 5:20–21 and 6:14 form an inclusio for 6:1–13:
A Law/old covenant stirs up sin, which results in death (5:20–21)
B Grace/new covenant unites believers with Christ’s death/resurrection, which results in dominion over sin and newness of life (6:1–13)
A?Law/old covenant enslaves one to sin (and death) (6:14)
Romans 6:1–14 can be outlined as follows:
1. The indicative of the Christian life: We have died and been raised with Christ (6:1–10)
a. The issue: Shall we sin so that grace may increase? (6:1)2
b. The answer: No, for one who has died to sin cannot continue to live in sin (6:2)
c. The explanation (6:3–10)
i. Christians died to sin in union with Christ’s death (6:3–5)
ii. Christians’ dominion over sin is in union with Christ’s life (6:6–10)3
2. The imperative of the Christian life: Now live like it (6:11–13)
3. Conclusion: We are under grace, not law (6:14)
Verses 1–7 are discussed below; verses 8–14 will be treated in the next unit.
Historical and Cultural Background
The major historical-cultural feature roughly contemporary with the New Testament that informs Romans 6:1–14 is the practice of baptism as an entry rite into a religious community. At least four religious groups required baptism of their new proselytes: rabbinic Judaism, the Dead Sea Scrolls community, the followers of John the Baptist, and the Greco-Roman mystery religions (see the “Additional Insights” section at the end of this unit).
Interpretive Insights
6:1 Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? Paul here states the issue: does the fact that God forgives us by his grace mean that we should go on sinning so that God’s grace will be exalted in continuing to forgive us? This issue arises out of his comments in 5:20–21: sin increases trespass, but grace more than compensates for sin. No doubt the Jews or even Jewish Christians whom Paul encountered in the synagogues raised this issue regarding the apostle’s understanding of grace and law.
6:2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin. Paul’s reply is his impassioned m? genoito (“May it never be!”). Since Christians have died to sin, how could they possibly continue to live in sin? “Live in sin” is best understood through the lens of the overlapping of the two ages. (1)The age to come has dawned; therefore, Christians have been delivered from the habitual practice of sin—that is, the power and dominion of sin. (2)The age to come is not yet complete; therefore, Christians occasionally might sin in their struggle with the continued presence of sin in this age.
6:3–4 all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were ... buried with him through baptism.[4] Verses3–10 provide Paul’s explanation regarding Christians having died and been raised with Christ. Verses3–7 emphasize that Christians have died to sin in union with Christ’s death, while verses8–10 highlight that Christians have been raised to a new life in union with Christ’s resurrection. Verses3–4 offer a profound thought: Christians died with Christ on the cross and were buried with him by means of their present baptism experience.5Paul can say that believers died and were buried with Christ because God is eternal and timeless; therefore past, present, and future are before him at the same time. Thus, God sees Christians (in the future from the cross) as though they were on the cross with Christ (in the past). Moreover, death with Christ in the past is actualized for Christians in their present baptism.6
There is an Adamic underpinning to 6:3–5: the lost dominion of the first Adam—life and glory—is being restored to the believer in Christ. Israel fared no better than Adam. The last words in 6:4 indicate this: “so we too might walk in newness of life” (NRSV). As James Dunn notes, “walk” (peripate?) is an Old Testament metaphor for obeying the law and statutes of Moses, which was supposed to bring life; instead, such attempts brought death for Israel.7But, according to Paul, faith in Christ removes one from the disobedience and death of the old covenant and places one in the new covenant, where there is obedience and life.8
6:5 united with him in a death like his ... united with him in a resurrection like his. Verse5 calls for two comments. First, dying in the “likeness” (hom*oi?ma) of Christ’s death probably means that the Christian’s participation in Christ’s death is real but not an exact correspondence, because Christ did not die for his own sins (he had none). Instead, Christ, the perfect one, took our sins upon himself in order to give us his righteousness (see 2Cor. 5:21). Second, being united with Christ in his resurrection attests to the overlapping of the two ages. Thus, Christ’s resurrection inaugurated the age to come, and therefore Christians have resurrection life (a “spiritual resurrection”) now; however, the believer’s body will not be resurrected until the return of the Lord. Until then, the Christian also lives in this age, an indication that the age to come is not yet fully here.
6:6 our old self was crucified with him so that the body ruled by sin might be done away with. Verses6–10 highlight the fact that Christians have been raised to newness of life in union with Christ’s resurrection. The “old self” (literally, “old man”) is the first Adam (cf. Col. 3:9; Eph. 4:22), whose primeval action placed this age under the dominion and rule of sin. Christ’s death and resurrection defeated the tyranny of sin and initiated the age to come and righteousness. Because the believer is united to Christ’s death and resurrection, the body of sin can be done away with. “Body ruled by sin” does not refer to only the physical body, nor does it suggest that the human body is sin. Rather, the body is the instrument or vehicle by which humans live in the world and through which sin (or righteousness) operates (see 6:12–13). Paul declares that sin’s influence over the human being as a body in this world is broken. “Done away with” (NIVmg.: “rendered powerless”) represents the verb katarge?, which means “to make powerless, ineffective,” as we have seen several times before. Thus, the law, the old covenant, and sin no longer have mastery over the believer.
6:7 anyone who has died has been set free from sin. Verse7 might reflect a general rabbinic maxim: “When a man is dead, he is freed from fulfilling the law” (b.Shabb. 151b [see Str-B 3:232]). If so, Paul specifically applies it to Christians: in their union with Christ’s death and resurrection, they have been delivered[9] from sin and the law.
Theological Insights
At least two key theological insights emerge from Romans 6:1–7. First, the indicative of justification precedes the imperative of sanctification. Otherwise, sanctification could degenerate into legalism. Second, it is no doubt the case that Paul and the early Christians would have been surprised to meet an unbaptized Christian. Not that there were not any; it is just that the normal expectation would have been for believers to identify themselves publicly as followers of Jesus by being baptized (cf. Rom. 10:9–10).
The Backgrounds of Christian Baptism: Several background issues provide additional insight into the Christian practice of baptism.
First, rabbinic Judaism required that Gentiles who wanted to become Jewish be circumcised, embrace the whole Torah, and be baptized (b.Ker. 9a). This was in contrast to the less stringent requirements upon God-fearers, those Gentiles who worshiped Israel’s God and had to submit to only the Noahic laws or a summary of the Torah.
Second, the Dead Sea Scrolls are fascinating in terms of comparing the Essenes’[1] practice of baptism with that of the New Testament church, especially since both communities claimed to be already participating in the new covenant (see CD 6.19; 19.33–34; Luke 22:20; 1Cor. 11:25; 2Cor. 3:1–4:6; Heb. 8–9). Essene proselytes were initiated into the fellowship by submitting to baptism, as were early Christians. Two foundational documents of the Essenes—the Rule of the Community (1QS) and the Damascus Document (CD) (both ca. 150 BC)—indicate that Essenes celebrated the initiate’s baptism as a new-covenant ritual (e.g., 1QS 3.4–9; 4.20–22; 5.13–14). Indeed, the entire community annually renewed its commitment to God by renewing the new covenant. Note, as shown in table 1, how all the covenant components of Deuteronomy inform these two documents, which is reminiscent of my outline of Romans (see “The Genre/Outline of Romans” in the introduction).
Third, there is a strong possibility that John the Baptist, who provided a direct precedent for the inclusion of baptism in the Christian message (Matt. 3; Mark 1:1–11; Luke 3:1–22; John 1:29–34 implicitly), once belonged to the Essene community.[2] If so, his message of a baptism of repentance to Jews may have originated with the Essenes, who also required Jewish initiates to be baptized, a practice normally reserved for Gentiles.
Fourth, it used to be fashionable among scholars to root Paul’s message of baptism in the mystery religions. Richard Reitzenstein and Wilhelm Bousset claimed that such wide-ranging religions as the Eleusinian mysteries and the cults of Isis and Osiris, Attis, and Mithras shared two commonalities with Paul’s message of baptism (and the Lord’s Supper): both focused on the dying and rising of their respective gods/goddesses, and both taught that the initiate enters into mystical union with these gods/goddesses by participating in the sacraments of baptism and the sacred meal.[3] Paul therefore borrowed his concept of baptism from the mystery religions. But more recent scholarship has rightly jettisoned this view, on at least five grounds. (1)The mystery deities’ deaths were not vicarious, whereas for Paul, Christ’s death was atoning. (2)The mystery deities did not die voluntarily, but Christ did. (3)The deities were mythological figures, but Jesus Christ was a historical person. (4)There was no apocalyptic framework for the mystery religions, but eschatology plays a pivotal role in how Paul interprets Jesus’ death and resurrection. (5)The mystery religions never actually taught that their deities were resurrected; rather, they were resuscitated. Not so for Paul and the early church: the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ was the bedrock of the Christian faith.[4]
Teaching the Text
An appropriate sermon based on Romans 6:1–14 is “Become What You Are!” Here the speaker could make the first two points shown in the outline above: the indicative of the Christian life (6:1–10) and the imperative of the Christian life (6:11–14). Both of these principles require faith to put into action. The first, the indicative, demands that Christians believe something that they cannot see: they are dead with Christ on the cross, buried with him, and now alive in his resurrection power and life. Yet, even though this cannot be seen with the human eye, the Christian’s union with Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection is theologically true because it is the way God perceives the situation, which is ultimate reality.
The second principle, the imperative, likewise requires faith on the Christian’s part because living out the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ depends on volition, not feelings. Thus, when believers are tempted, they must will their way through the solicitation relying upon the Holy Spirit to guide them. Or when Christians have God-given tasks, they must perform them whether or not they are excited about them, all the while depending on God’s strength to empower them. Or when believers face daunting trials, by faith they must endure those afflictions knowing that God will see them through. And so it is that Christians need to become what they are in Christ. God presents us with tasks and trials and allows us to face temptations in order to develop our faith, which translates the indicative into the imperative.
Illustrating the Text
Sanctification must build on the foundation of justification.
Quotes: Two well-known statements from two famous literary figures could be contrasted with the teaching of a Christian catechism. The Enlightenment skeptic Voltaire (1694–1778) once said sardonically, “God will forgive; that is his business.” In poet W.H. Auden’s (1907–73) insightful Christmas oratorio For the Time Being, Herod contemplates the implications of God coming to earth as a child. Justice, he thinks, will be replaced with “Pity,” upsetting what he sees as the natural order: “I like committing crimes. God likes forgiving them. Really, the world is admirably arranged.” In sharp contrast, the Westminster Larger Catechism asks, “Wherein do justification and sanctification differ?” It answers, “Although sanctification be inseparably joined with justification, yet they differ, in that God in justification imputes the righteousness of Christ; in sanctification his Spirit infuses grace, and enables to the exercise thereof; in the former, sin is pardoned; in the other, it is subdued” (Question77).
The Christian must make spiritual progress.
Literature: The Pilgrim’s Progress, by John Bunyan. In The Pilgrim’s Progress (1678), after Christian has been to the cross, lost his burden, and fallen asleep on the Hill of Difficulty as a failure, he comes for a time of rest to the House Beautiful. Here, he is fed well, mentored, and encouraged spiritually by four women: Discretion, Piety, Charity, and Prudence. The women also ask him pointed questions about where he came from, how he thinks about his past, and so on in order to ascertain where he stands in his Christian life and to mark his progress in preparation for what is to come.
Television: The Good Wife. In the first season of this show, the episode “Heart” has some dialogue not typically heard in popular television shows. Peter Florrick, a politically connected man and the husband of Alicia Florrick, has fallen sexually multiple times and has been in jail for misusing public money. He is now under house arrest, and he is trying to court a black pastor, Isaiah Easton, to make points with the black community. Isaiah instead approaches Peter about his spiritual condition, eventually backing him into a corner and telling him he must want to change; this will come through knowing Jesus and allowing Jesus to effect a complete internal transformation. Otherwise, the pastor assures Peter, his marriage will not heal, nor will life work.
New Dominion as a Blessing of the New Covenant: Alive to God
Big Idea: In the preceding unit we saw that in chapter6 Paul presents another blessing: the new dominion inaugurated by Christ. Believers enter that new dominion by uniting with Christ’s death and resurrection: they become dead to sin, alive to God. Now Paul urges believers to live lives befitting their status as those who have been brought from death to life.
Understanding the Text
See Romans 6:1–7 for an outline of Romans 6:1–14.
Historical and Cultural Background
The reader should consult the “Historical and Cultural Background” section presented for Romans 6:1–7 and the “Additional Insights” following that unit.
Interpretive Insights
6:8 if we died with Christ ... we will also live with him. Verse8 focuses on believers. This verse, like 6:5, taps into the overlapping of the two ages: the age to come came with Christ’s death and resurrection, and therefore Christians share in his resurrection life now. But the age to come will not be complete until the parousia (the return of Christ); only then will believers receive their resurrection body. Both occur by virtue of the believer’s union with Christ.
6:9–10 The death he died, he died to sin once for all. Verses 9–10 focus on Christ and root the Christian’s new dominion over sin in Christ’s death and resurrection. “He died to sin” does not suggest that Christ was sinful and died because of it. Instead, it reflects the same sentiment that we saw in 6:5 and the “likeness” (hom*oi?ma) of his death: Christ died for our sins; he had no sins of his own. “Once for all” refers to the fact that Christ’s death once and for all atoned for sin. This is often referred to by theologians as “the finished work of Christ on the cross.”
6:11–13 count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Verses 11–13 record both the indicative and the imperative of the Christian life: since believers are counted as dead, buried, and resurrected with Christ, they should walk in newness of life. In other words, they should become (imperative) what they are (indicative). Or, more accurately, they should become what they are becoming. Paul uses four imperatives in verses11–13: “count” yourself dead to sin but alive to God (v.11); “do not let sin reign” in your present life (v.12); “do not offer” any part of yourself to sin (v.13); “offer” your whole self to God (v.13). “Count” is the same word, logizomai, used in 4:1–8 of God counting as righteous those who believe his promise. The same idea is present here in 6:11: Christians should believe it to be true that they have died and been raised with Christ to a new life. Here we see that not only is justification by faith, but also sanctification likewise is by faith. Faith is required to live a holy life because the Christian still lives in this age of struggle.
6:14 you are not under the law, but under grace. Verse14 with 5:20–21 forms an inclusio for 6:1–13 by way of contrast. The pattern is the same pattern that we saw relative to 5:12–21: law leads to sin, which leads to death.1By way of contrast, grace leads to righteousness, which leads to life.
Theological Insights
Two theological insights nicely cover Romans 6:8–14. First, the Christian is in union with Christ through the Spirit. Such a connection amounts to the believer having a spiritual parallel life: we are simultaneously on this earth while spiritually in Christ in heaven (compare 6:8–13 with Eph. 2:4–7; Col. 3:1–4). This is not psychological disassociation or medical schizophrenia but a metaphysical reality for the believer. Becoming cognizant of our union with Christ actually makes us better people here in this world. But what exactly does it mean to say that the Christian is in union with Christ? On the one hand, the Christian’s union with Christ is not to be interpreted literally, such as when some theologians in the past claimed that the believer is absorbed into Christ, which produces a light, ethereal form of existence. But, on the other hand, neither should the Christian’s intimate association with Christ by the Spirit be reduced to mere figurative language, as even more New Testament scholars are prone to do today. To better understand Paul’s mysticism as reflected in his phrase “in Christ,” we should turn to Ephesians 1:1–2:7. There we read that the believer has a past, present, and future in the mind of God. Thus, God chose the Christian and the church in eternity past. And God raised the believer to heaven with Christ at his resurrection. Furthermore, in the age to come in heaven, God will showcase the Christian as a trophy of divine grace. While these three tenses are sequential to the human perspective, with God they are simultaneously before him. And it seems that this is the key to understanding our union with Christ. It is in the mind of God that the believer has already been raised to the heavens with Christ and seated on the divine throne with him. Thus, we are permitted to say that Christ is in the Christian on earth by the Holy Spirit while the believer is in heaven in the mind of God, where past, present, and future coincide.
Second, discipline is the key to successfully living the Christian life. The militaristic background of Romans 6:12–14 attests to this principle. Rising before the crack of dawn, rigorous regimens of exercise, endless practice drills, unencumbered by civilian life, and committed to one’s country to the point of death—these are the ways of disciplined soldiers. And such should be the case for the follower of the cross of Christ. I teach young people at a Christian university, and one of the first things I share with them at the beginning of a course is this spiritual axiom: discipline is the key to living for the Lord (and to passing my course!). I challenge them to dare to believe that discipline leads to delight, that faithfulness brings fulfillment, and that obedience results in joy.
These two theological insights are very much related: drawing on our union with Christ and his Spirit is the way to become disciplined in the Christian life. Discipline without union with Jesus degenerates into the energy of the flesh, but through the power of the indwelling Spirit of Christ, believers discover the resources that they need to say no to sin and yes to God.
Teaching the Text
In teaching the theological insight of union with Christ, the speaker may want to discuss Romans 6:8–14 in conjunction with Ephesians 1:1–2:7 and Colossians 3:1–4, both of which deal with the Christian’s parallel spiritual life in heaven. The teacher could use my suggestion that the past election of believers, their present reign in Christ in heaven, and their future praise to the glory of God the heavenly Father are in the mind of God, before whom all tenses are present at once. This might allay any fear that Paul or Christians are mentally unbalanced in trying to describe their intimate association with Christ by his Spirit! Once again, the key to all of this is for the Christian to believe in that spiritual reality even if they do not feel it. I would use the touching poem “Footprints in the Sand” to drive home the last comment. Even as the author of that piece expressed concern to God that there was only one set of footprints in the sand during the worst times of life, it was in actuality because God was carrying the author. In a similar way, as believers step out in faith to accomplish their tasks, resist their temptations, and endure their trials, it is often only after those actions are completed that Christians come to realize that God was with them all along, empowering their every step.
In driving home the lesson that discipline is the key to the Christian life, the teacher could read in staccato-like style the imperatives in verses 11–13: “Count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God!” “Do not let sin reign” in your present life! “Do not offer” your body to sin! “But rather offer yourselves to God!” Uttering these commands in that way gives the impression that the audience is in boot camp. This can be reinforced by listing the militaristic images in verses 12–14: “be lord over,” “reign,” “instruments of righteousness,” “obedience.” The effect of pronouncing these commands and military images with the tone of a drill sergeant can make the passage come alive. Reciting a hymn like “Onward Christian Soldiers” could further rouse the congregation to a newfound discipline to be soldiers of the cross. Furthermore, the teacher of this passage can encourage listeners that after a while discipline becomes a way of life, a matter of habit. Difficult but good habits that we develop over time become second nature to us, and we feel incomplete when we neglect them, however briefly that may be.
Illustrating the Text
Christians are called to union with Christ.
Film: Avatar. James Cameron’s Oscar-winning movie (2009) provides a nice illustration for grasping the spiritual parallel life of the Christian in union with Christ. The lead character in the movie undergoes moral struggle in deciding between being faithful to his military commander’s orders to forcibly relocate the “Na’vi” people and defending these creatures he has now come to love. That struggle is intensified by the fact that the hero of the story can change from his earthly body into the incredible body of the Avatar. But the more he lives in his newly found parallel universe, the more he wants to leave his frail earthly body. This is similar to Christians who live life on earth with all of its struggles while longing to assume their heavenly existence. They are caught between two worlds, two ages. But the more believers concentrate on their spiritual existence in heaven in the mind of God, the more effectively they can serve Christ and his church on earth.
Discipline is key to the Christian life.
Personal Testimony: A profound experience early in my life has taught me (Marvin) the importance of discipline in the Christian life. When at age sixteen I sensed that the Lord was calling me into the ministry, I reasoned that if I was going to preach the Bible then I needed to start studying the Bible for myself and not depend solely on the preacher’s sermons or on devotional booklets. So I began getting up an hour earlier each day in order to read and meditate on the Bible and then pray. I did this for about a year, but without getting anything out of my study times. I wanted to quit my devotional time with the Lord on a number of mornings because it seemed so dry. Yet I did stick with my daily devotional plan for a whole year without any noticeable change.
After that first year of Bible study, however, something amazing happened—the Bible and prayer came alive to me! In fact, my Bible study became so exciting that I began to take notes on each verse I contemplated, eventually filling whole notebooks on one biblical book after the next. I sometimes think that the Lord was testing me during that first year to see if I really meant business. By the power of the Spirit I remained disciplined during the dull times of my early devotional studies, which eventually gave way to what has for forty-two years become the most meaningful part of my day. And that morning talk with God has in turn increased spiritual discipline in my life. I believe it will do the same for others.
Hymn Text: “Onward Christian Soldiers,” by Sabine Baring-Gould.
Onward, Christian soldiers,
marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus
going on before.
Christ, the royal Master,
leads against the foe;
forward into battle
see his banners go!
Onward, Christian soldiers,
marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus
going on before.
At the sign of triumph
Satan’s host doth flee;
on then, Christian soldiers,
on to victory!
Hell’s foundations quiver
at the shout of praise;
brothers, lift your voices,
loud your anthems raise.
Onward, Christian soldiers,
marching as to war,
with the cross of Jesus
going on before.
Teaching the Text by C. Marvin Pate, Baker Publishing Group, 2016
Direct Matches
The initiatory ritual of Christianity. This rite is of great significance in connecting the individual both to Christ and to the greater community of believers. Baptism carries an equal measure of symbolism and tradition, evoking a connection between OT covenantal circumcision and ritual cleansing and NT regeneration and redemption.
The immediate precursor of Christian baptism was the baptism of John the Baptist (Mark 1:4 pars.), a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, preparing the hearts of the people for the coming Messiah. But when Jesus himself was baptized by John to “fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) and to allow Jesus to identify with sinful humanity, he became the firstfruits of the new covenant. John emphasized that his baptism with water was inferior to the baptism “with the Holy Spirit and fire” that Jesus would bring (Matt. 3:11). Jesus’ disciples continued John’s baptism during his earthly ministry (John 4:12).
Baptism was immediately important in the early church. Jesus commanded the disciples to “make disciples..., baptizing them” (Matt. 28:19). The disciples replaced Judas from among those “who have been with us the whole time ... from John’s baptism” (Acts 1:21–22). Peter’s first sermon proclaims, “Repent and be baptized” (2:38). The apostles baptized new believers in Christ immediately (8:12–13, 38; 9:18; 10:48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5; 22:16).
For the apostle Paul, baptism represents a participation in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul writes, “Don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death” (Rom. 6:3–4); “In him you were ... buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead” (Col. 2:11–12).
There are numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized as following a servant-master model. These included service to the monarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in the temple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also see extensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:111; Lev. 25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concerned with the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelines for their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaves who had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of six years. On the seventh year, known also as the Sabbath Year, they were to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent away empty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s “threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slaves also had certain rights that gave them special privileges and protection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, were allowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays (Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their master permanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also, severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death (Exod. 21:20–21).
Slavery was very common in the first century AD, and there were many different kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in an extended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they might choose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25). Although slavery was a significant part of society in the first century AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery. Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obedience for slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25; 1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21). Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves (Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned by the apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim. 1:10–11).
Jesus embodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled the role of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servant predicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9; 52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in the Gospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve (Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5). Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the very nature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
The special relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured in the servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’s letters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses not so much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegiance and honor owed to Christ Jesus.
The founder of what became known as the movement of Jesus followers or Christianity. For Christian believers, Jesus Christ embodies the personal and supernatural intervention of God in human history.
Birth and childhood. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke record Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem during the reign of Herod the Great (Matt. 2:1; Luke 2:4, 11). Jesus was probably born between 6 and 4 BC, shortly before Herod’s death (Matt. 2:19). Both Matthew and Luke record the miracle of a virginal conception made possible by the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:35). Luke mentions a census under the Syrian governor Quirinius that was responsible for Jesus’ birth taking place in Bethlehem (2:15). Both the census and the governorship at the time of the birth of Jesus have been questioned by scholars. Unfortunately, there is not enough extrabiblical evidence to either confirm or disprove these events, so their veracity must be determined on the basis of one’s view regarding the general reliability of the Gospel tradition.
On the eighth day after his birth, Jesus was circumcised, in keeping with the Jewish law, at which time he officially was named “Jesus” (Luke 2:21). He spent his growing years in Nazareth, in the home of his parents, Joseph and Mary (2:40). Of the NT Gospels, the Gospel of Luke contains the only brief portrayal of Jesus’ growth in strength, wisdom, and favor with God and people (2:40, 52). Luke also contains the only account of Jesus as a young boy (2:41–49).
Baptism, temptation, and start of ministry. After Jesus was baptized by the prophet John the Baptist (Luke 3:21–22), God affirmed his pleasure with him by referring to him as his Son, whom he loved (Matt. 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22). Jesus’ baptism did not launch him into fame and instant ministry success; instead, Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, where he was tempted for forty days (Matt. 4:1–11; Mark 1:12–13; Luke 4:1–13). Mark stresses that the temptations immediately followed the baptism. Matthew and Luke identify three specific temptations by the devil, though their order for the last two is reversed. Both Matthew and Luke agree that Jesus was tempted to turn stones into bread, expect divine intervention after jumping off the temple portico, and receive all the world’s kingdoms for worshiping the devil. Jesus resisted all temptation, quoting Scripture in response.
Matthew and Mark record that Jesus began his ministry in Capernaum in Galilee, after the arrest of John the Baptist (Matt. 4:12–13; Mark 1:14). Luke says that Jesus started his ministry at about thirty years of age (3:23). This may be meant to indicate full maturity or perhaps correlate this age with the onset of the service of the Levites in the temple (cf. Num. 4:3). John narrates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry by focusing on the calling of the disciples and the sign performed at a wedding at Cana (1:35–2:11).
Galilean ministry. The early stages of Jesus’ ministry centered in and around Galilee. Jesus presented the good news and proclaimed that the kingdom of God was near. Matthew focuses on the fulfillment of prophecy (Matt. 4:13–17). Luke records Jesus’ first teaching in his hometown, Nazareth, as paradigmatic (Luke 4:16–30); the text that Jesus quoted, Isa. 61:1–2, set the stage for his calling to serve and revealed a trajectory of rejection and suffering.
All the Gospels record Jesus’ gathering of disciples early in his Galilean ministry (Matt. 4:18–22; Mark 1:16–20; Luke 5:1–11; John 1:35–51). The formal call and commissioning of the Twelve who would become Jesus’ closest followers is recorded in different parts of the Gospels (Matt. 10:1–4; Mark 3:13–19; Luke 6:12–16). A key event in the early ministry is the Sermon on the Mount/Plain (Matt. 5:1–7:29; Luke 6:20–49). John focuses on Jesus’ signs and miracles, in particular in the early parts of his ministry, whereas the Synoptics focus on healings and exorcisms.
During Jesus’ Galilean ministry, onlookers struggled with his identity. However, evil spirits knew him to be of supreme authority (Mark 3:11). Jesus was criticized by outsiders and by his own family (3:21). The scribes from Jerusalem identified him as a partner of Beelzebul (3:22). Amid these situations of social conflict, Jesus told parables that couched his ministry in the context of a growing kingdom of God. This kingdom would miraculously spring from humble beginnings (4:1–32).
The Synoptics present Jesus’ early Galilean ministry as successful. No challenge or ministry need superseded Jesus’ authority or ability: he calmed a storm (Mark 4:35–39), exorcized many demons (5:1–13), raised the dead (5:35–42), fed five thousand (6:30–44), and walked on water (6:48–49).
In the later part of his ministry in Galilee, Jesus often withdrew and traveled to the north and the east. The Gospel narratives are not written with a focus on chronology. However, only brief returns to Galilee appear to have taken place prior to Jesus’ journey to Jerusalem. As people followed Jesus, faith was praised and fear resolved. Jerusalem’s religious leaders traveled to Galilee, where they leveled accusations and charged Jesus’ disciples with lacking ritual purity (Mark 7:1–5). Jesus shamed the Pharisees by pointing out their dishonorable treatment of parents (7:11–13). The Pharisees challenged his legitimacy by demanding a sign (8:11). Jesus refused them signs but agreed with Peter, who confessed, “You are the Messiah” (8:29). Jesus did provide the disciples a sign: his transfiguration (9:2–8).
Jesus withdrew from Galilee to Tyre and Sidon, where a Syrophoenician woman requested healing for her daughter. Jesus replied, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Galileans had long resented the Syrian provincial leadership partiality that allotted governmental funds in ways that made the Jews receive mere “crumbs.” Consequently, when the woman replied, “Even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table,” Jesus applauded her faith (Matt. 15:27–28). Healing a deaf-mute man in the Decapolis provided another example of Jesus’ ministry in Gentile territory (Mark 7:31–37). Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Christ took place during Jesus’ travel to Caesarea Philippi, a well-known Gentile territory. The city was the ancient center of worship of the Hellenistic god Pan.
Judean ministry. Luke records a geographic turning point in Jesus’ ministry as he resolutely set out for Jerusalem, a direction that eventually led to his death (Luke 9:51). Luke divides the journey to Jerusalem into three phases (9:51–13:21; 13:22–17:10; 17:11–19:27). The opening verses of phase one emphasize a prophetic element of the journey. Jesus viewed his ministry in Jerusalem as his mission, and the demands on discipleship intensified as Jesus approached Jerusalem (Matt. 20:17–19, 26–28; Mark 10:38–39, 43–45; Luke 14:25–35). Luke presents the second phase of the journey toward Jerusalem with a focus on conversations regarding salvation and judgment (Luke 13:22–30). In the third and final phase of the journey, the advent of the kingdom and the final judgment are the main themes (17:20–37; 19:11–27).
Social conflicts with religious leaders increased throughout Jesus’ ministry. These conflicts led to lively challenge-riposte interactions concerning the Pharisaic schools of Shammai and Hillel (Matt. 19:1–12; Mark 10:1–12). Likewise, socioeconomic feathers were ruffled as Jesus welcomed young children, who had little value in society (Matt. 19:13–15; Mark 10:13–16; Luke 18:15–17).
Passion week, death, and resurrection. Each of the Gospels records Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem with the crowds extending him a royal welcome (Matt. 21:4–9; Mark 11:7–10; Luke 19:35–38; John 12:12–15). Luke describes Jesus’ ministry in Jerusalem as a time during which Jesus taught in the temple as Israel’s Messiah (19:45–21:38).
In Jerusalem, Jesus cleansed the temple of profiteering (Mark 11:15–17). Mark describes the religious leaders as fearing Jesus because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching, and so they “began looking for a way to kill him” (11:18). Dismayed, each segment of Jerusalem’s temple leadership inquired about Jesus’ authority (11:27–33). Jesus replied with cunning questions (12:16, 35–36), stories (12:1–12), denunciation (12:38–44), and a prediction of Jerusalem’s own destruction (13:1–31). One of Jesus’ own disciples, Judas Iscariot, provided the temple leaders the opportunity for Jesus’ arrest (14:10–11).
At the Last Supper, Jesus instituted a new Passover, defining a new covenant grounded in his sufferings (Matt. 26:17–18, 26–29; Mark 14:16–25; Luke 22:14–20). He again warned the disciples of his betrayal and arrest (Matt. 26:21–25, 31; Mark 14:27–31; Luke 22:21–23; John 13:21–30), and later he prayed for the disciples (John 17:1–26) and prayed in agony and submissiveness in the garden of Gethsemane (Matt. 26:36–42; Mark 14:32–42; Luke 22:39–42). His arrest, trial, crucifixion, death, and resurrection followed (Matt. 26:46–28:15; Mark 14:43–16:8; Luke 22:47–24:9; John 18:1–20:18). Jesus finally commissioned his disciples to continue his mission by making disciples of all the nations (Matt. 28:18–20; Acts 1:8) and ascended to heaven with the promise that he will one day return (Luke 24:50–53; Acts 1:9–11).
People in the Bible were family-centered and staunchly loyal to their kin. Families formed the foundation of society. The extended family was the source of people’s status in the community and provided the primary economic, educational, religious, and social interactions.
Marriage and divorce. Marriage in the ancient Near East was a contractual arrangement between two families, arranged by the bride’s father or a male representative. The bride’s family was paid a dowry, a “bride’s price.” Paying a dowry was not only an economic transaction but also an expression of family honor. Only the rich could afford multiple dowries. Thus, polygamy was minimal. The wedding itself was celebrated with a feast provided by the father of the groom.
The primary purpose for marriage in the ancient Near East was to produce a male heir to ensure care for the couple in their old age. The concept of inheritance was a key part of the marriage customs, especially with regard to passing along possessions and property.
Marriage among Jews in the NT era still tended to be endogamous; that is, Jews sought to marry close kin without committing incest violations (Lev. 18:617). A Jewish male certainly was expected to marry a Jew. Exogamy, marrying outside the remote kinship group, and certainly outside the ethnos, was understood as shaming God’s holiness. Thus, a Jew marrying a Gentile woman was not an option. The Romans did practice exogamy. For them, marrying outside one’s kinship group (not ethnos) was based predominantly on creating strategic alliances between families.
Greek and Roman law allowed both men and women to initiate divorce. In Jewish marriages, only the husband could initiate divorce proceedings. If a husband divorced his wife, he had to release her and repay the dowry. Divorce was common in cases of infertility (in particular if the woman had not provided male offspring). Ben Sira comments that barrenness in a woman is a cause of anxiety to the father (Sir. 42:9–10). Another reason for divorce was adultery (Exod. 20:14; Deut. 5:18). Jesus, though, taught a more restrictive use of divorce than the OT (Mark 10:1–12).
Children and parenting. Childbearing was considered representative of God’s blessing on a woman and her entire family, in particular her husband. In contrast to this blessing, barrenness brought shame on women, their families, and specifically their husbands.
Children were of low social status in society. Infant mortality was high. An estimated 60percent of the children in the first-century Mediterranean society were dead by the age of sixteen.
Ancient Near Eastern and Mediterranean societies exhibited a parenting style based on their view of human nature as a mixture of good and evil tendencies. Parents relied on physical punishment to prevent evil tendencies from developing into evil deeds (Prov. 29:15). The main concern of parents was to socialize the children into family loyalty. Lack of such loyalty was punished (Lev. 20:9). At a very early stage children were taught to accept the total authority of the father. The rearing of girls was entirely the responsibility of the women. Girls were taught domestic roles and duties as soon as possible so that they could help with household tasks.
Family identity was used as a metaphor in ancient Israel to speak of fidelity, responsibility, judgment, and reconciliation. In the OT, the people of Israel often are described as children of God. In their overall relationship to God, the people of Israel are referred to in familial terms—sons and daughters, spouse, and firstborn (Exod. 4:22). God is addressed as the father of the people (Isa. 63:16; 64:8) and referred to as their mother (Isa. 49:14–17).
The church as the family of God. Throughout his ministry, Jesus called his disciples to follow him. This was a call to loyalty (Matt. 10:32–40; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26), a call to fictive kinship, the family of God (Matt. 12:48–50; Mark 3:33–35). Jesus’ declaration “On this rock I will build my church” (Matt. 16:18) was preceded by the call to community. Entrance into the community was granted through adopting the values of the kingdom, belief, and the initiation rite of baptism (Matt. 10:37–39; 16:24–26; Mark 8:34–38; Luke 9:23–26, 57–63; John 1:12; 3:16; 10:27–29; Acts 2:38; 16:31–33; 17:30; Rom. 10:9). Jesus’ presence as the head of the community was eventually replaced by the promised Spirit (John 14:16–18). Through the Spirit, Jesus’ ministry continues in the community of his followers, God’s family—the church. See also Adoption.
The tangible presence of God, experienced as overwhelming power and splendor. The main Hebrew word referring to glory, kabod, has the root meaning “heavy” (1Sam. 4:18), which in other contexts can mean “intense” (Exod. 9:3; NIV: “terrible”), “wealthy” (i.e., “heavy in possessions” [Gen. 13:2]), and “high reputation” (Gen. 34:19; NIV: “most honored”). When used of God, it refers to his person and his works. God reveals his glory to Israel and to Egypt at the crossing of the sea (Exod. 14:4, 1719). He carefully reveals his glory to Moses after Israel’s sin with the golden calf in order to assure him that he will not abandon them (33:12–23).
In the NT the glory of God is made real in the person of Jesus Christ (John 1:14; Heb. 1:3). He is, after all, the very presence of God. When he returns on the clouds, he will fully reveal God’s glory (Matt. 24:30; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:27).
Grace is the nucleus, the critical core element, of the redemptive and sanctifying work of the triune God detailed throughout the entire canon of Scripture. The variegated expressions of grace are rooted in the person and work of God, so that his graciousness and favor effectively demonstrated in every aspect of the created realm glorify him as they are shared and enjoyed with one another.
The biblical terminology informing an understanding of grace defines it as a gift or a favorable reaction or disposition toward someone. Grace is generosity, thanks, and good will between humans and from God to humans. Divine expressions of grace are loving, merciful, and effective. The biblical texts provide a context for a more robust understanding of divine gift. The overall redemptive-historical context of grace is the desire of the eternal God to bring glory to himself through a grace-based relationship with his creation. The Creator-Redeemer gives grace, and the recipients of grace give him glory.
The Bible often refers to songs, music, musical sounds and instruments, and dancing.
Instruments
Strings. The most frequently mentioned instrument is the kinnor, a lyre, also often referred to as a harp. The sound box of the harp is at the base, from which a straight or curved neck rises at a sharp angle so that the strings going from the box to the neck are of different length. The lyre has two uprights and a crosspiece on top, from which the strings of similar length stretch down to the sound box. The kinnor-lyre had eight to ten strings (based on Akkadian and Ugaritic findings and Jewish descriptions) and could be played with a pick or by hand. David’s “harp” was such a lyre. The “harp” mentioned in the NT (1Cor. 14:7; Rev. 5:8; 14:2; 15:2) probably was also a lyre. Another OT lyre, or perhaps a harp, the nebel, complemented the kinnor-lyre. Jewish tradition about the strings implies that it produced a lower sound. The nebel-lyre is most often mentioned with other instruments, though occasionally alone. Another stringed instrument mentioned three times, the ’asor, may have been a harp or a lyre with ten strings (Pss. 33:2; 92:3; 144:9). In Pss. 45:8; 150:4 there is mention of “the strings,” which may refer to more than just the stringed instruments specifically mentioned in the Bible. The ancient world also had lutes, an instrument with a long, straight neck, fretted like a guitar or ukulele, proceeding from a small sound box.
Percussion. Timbrels, cymbals, and castanets or rattles are percussion instruments mentioned in the Bible. The timbrel was a hand drum, like a tambourine but without metal jingles. The timbrel accompanies dancing and may have been used by the dancers (Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1Sam. 18:6). Cymbals may have been paired or individual, but it is not certain whether these latter were suspended cymbals or finger cymbals, being four to six inches in diameter. In 2Sam. 6:5 there is mention of another percussion instrument, mena’an’im (the root of this word means “to shake”), perhaps “sistrums” (NIV) or “castanets” (NASB) (although the KJV renders it as “cornets”). Castanets were small hand-clappers joined with a string. Israel likely had all of these, though it is hard to know which is referred to in 2Sam. 6:5. The cymbal is mentioned once in the NT (1Cor. 13:1), though not as musically pleasing in that context.
Woodwinds and horns. The OT attests to both an animal horn, most frequently called a shopar, and a metal trumpet, the khatsotserah (Num. 10:210). The NT refers to a horn with a word used to translate both OT terms (salpinx). The ancient world had both flutes and shawms. Shawms have a bell-like flare at the end, while the shaft of a flute is straight to the end. What is likely a double-reed shawm is frequently translated “flute” (1Sam. 10:5; 1Kings 1:40; Isa. 5:12; 30:29; Jer. 48:36 [NIV: “pipes”]). It is unclear whether the instrument mentioned in Gen. 4:21; Ps. 150:4 commonly translated as “flute” is a woodwind or a stringed instrument. The NT also mentions a flute or reed instrument (Matt. 11:17; 9:23; 1Cor. 14:7; Rev. 18:22) that could be played for dancing or mourning.
Dancing
The dancing mentioned in the Bible is usually celebratory and positive and is combined with singing or the playing of musical instruments. Such dancing may occur at any happy occasion but is mentioned most often in connection with victory or worship (e.g., Exod. 15:20; Judg. 11:34; 1Sam. 18:6). The women of Shiloh “join in the dancing” (Judg. 21:21) at an annual festival, which implies some manner of folk dancing. The dancing of Herodias’s daughter probably was erotic (Matt. 14:6; Mark 6:22), and the dancing of the Israelites around the golden calf probably was laden with sensuality as well (Exod. 32:19).
In general, Torah (Law) may be subdivided into three categories: judicial, ceremonial, and moral, though each of these may influence or overlap with the others. The OT associates the “giving of the Torah” with Moses’ first divine encounter at Mount Sinai (Exod. 1923) following the Israelites’ deliverance from the land of Egypt, though some body of customary legislation existed before this time (Exod. 18). These instructions find expansion and elucidation in other pentateuchal texts, such as Leviticus and Deut. 12–24, indicating that God’s teachings were intended as the code of conduct and worship for Israel not only during its wilderness wanderings but also when it settled in the land of Canaan following the conquest.
More specifically, the word “law” often denotes the Ten Commandments (or “the Decalogue,” lit., the “ten words”) (Exod. 34:28; Deut. 4:13; 10:4) that were delivered to Moses (Exod. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21). These commandments reflect a summary statement of the covenant and may be divided into two parts, consistent with the two tablets of stone on which they were first recorded: the first four address the individual’s relationship to God, and the last six focus on instructions concerning human relationships. Despite the apparent simplistic expression of the Decalogue, the complexity of these guidelines extends beyond individual acts and attitudes, encompassing any and all incentives, enticements, and pressures leading up to a thing forbidden. Not only should the individual refrain from doing the prohibited thing, but also he or she is obligated to practice its opposite good in order to be in compliance.
The word “likeness” is used in various contexts. The foundational concept of likeness, however, is found in Gen. 1:26: “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness.” This announces the high status of humans as the pinnacle of God’s creation (also Gen. 5:12). Genesis 5:3 says that Adam fathered Seth “in his own likeness, in his own image,” employing both words found in 1:26. The precise meaning of this has been much debated. Three things are to be noted. First, the expression “let us,” versus “let there be,” implies a personal aspect. It refers to the human capacity to relate to God in worship and obedience of his word (2Cor. 4:4; Eph. 4:24). Second, the word “likeness” describes human beings as not simply representative of God but representational. Humankind is the visible, corporeal representative of the invisible, bodiless God. Third, being in God’s likeness/image sets human beings apart from everything else that God has made. Humankind’s supremacy and uniqueness are emphasized.
Christ’s resurrection is the foundational event for the Christian faith. Paul goes so far as to say that if Christ did not rise, then the Christian faith is futile and Christians are to be pitied more than all others (1Cor. 15:1719). Resurrection’s climaxing position in all four Gospel narratives yields the same understanding. Christ came not merely to die, as some claim, but to conquer death. Resurrection gives everything that Christ did before his death an “of God” significance, and it establishes everything that follows as a guarantee of God’s eschatological promises. Without the resurrection, Jesus would have been just another “prophet hopeful” who died a tragic peasant death in Jerusalem. However, as it is, evidenced by the resurrection, he is the Son of God. According to the NT, the resurrection is the triumphant cry that God indeed did come to visit his creation and conquer the power of sin and death.
Although the Gospels’ presentations of Jesus’ resurrection vary in some detail (probably due to purpose and audience), all of them treat the event as the theological centerpiece of the Gospel narrative. The resurrection story launches God’s eschatological work and opens the door, as the postresurrection appearances show, for a connection between the Jesus story and the church story. It is the foundation both for the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18–20) and for Pentecost (Luke 24:49). All people of all nations can now meet the living Christ.
Righteousness is an important theme in both Testaments of the Bible. The concept includes faithfulness, justice, uprightness, correctness, loyalty, blamelessness, purity, salvation, and innocence. Because the theme is related to justification, it has important implications for the doctrine of salvation.
Being careful to avoid imposing Western philosophical categories onto OT texts, we may say that the core idea of righteousness is conformity to God’s person and will in moral uprightness, justness, justice, integrity, and faithfulness. Behind the many and varied uses of righteousness language in the OT stands the presupposition that God himself is righteous in the ultimate sense (e.g., Ezra 9:15; Isa. 45:21; Zeph. 3:5). Righteousness is the expression of his holiness in relationship to others (Isa. 5:16), and all other nuances of righteousness in the biblical texts are derived from this.
Related to humans, righteousness is often found as the opposite of wickedness. Righteousness often occurs in evaluative contexts, where it relates to proper conduct with respect to God, the order of the world as he created it, the covenant, or law (e.g., Deut. 6:25). God reigns in righteousness and justice (e.g., Ps. 97:2), and humans should align their conduct with this righteous reign. Righteousness can be expressed as personal integrity with phrases such as “my righteousness” (2Sam. 22:21, 25; Ps. 7:8) and “their righteousness” (1Sam. 26:23). Unrighteousness is found in poetic parallel to injustice (e.g., Jer. 22:13); the unjust are parallel with the wicked (Ps. 82:2).
Righteousness language is more rare in the Gospels than one might expect in light of OT and Jewish intertestamental usage. These references fit with the Jewish setting: righteousness is required of God’s people, and unrighteousness is to be avoided. Righteousness is proper conduct with respect to God or Torah (Matt. 21:32) in contrast to wickedness (Matt. 13:49). Righteousness could be conceived as one’s own (e.g., Luke 18:9) and has its reward (Matt. 10:41). While the specific terms related to righteousness are infrequent in the Gospels, the broader concept of conformity to God’s will is widely apparent in calls for repentance, personal moral uprightness, mercy, and concern for the marginalized. The NT Epistles continue these general strands of the concept. Righteousness is related to personal conduct (1Thess. 2:10; 1Tim. 6:11; 2Tim. 2:22; 1Pet. 2:24) and is contrasted with wickedness (2Cor. 6:14); it is a matter of doing, not knowing (Rom. 2:13). An example of righteousness in doing is the kindness shown by the prostitute Rahab, who hid the Israelite spies (James 2:25).
The NT does signal some new dimensions related to righteousness. In the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 57), Jesus extends the requirements of righteousness to conformity to his own teaching and directives, a shocking display of authority. In his mission to call sinners rather than the “righteous” (e.g., Mark 2:17), Jesus implicitly questions the righteousness of the “righteous.” In similar manner, personal righteousness in terms of a righteousness of one’s own is negative in the NT (Rom. 10:3; Phil. 3:6; cf. Luke 18:9).
The NT continues the OT theme of righteousness as it relates to God himself. God is righteous (John 17:25; Rom. 3:5; 9:14; Heb. 6:10; cf. Matt. 6:33). His judgments are righteous (Rom. 2:5), and his commands and laws are righteous (Rom. 7:12; 8:4). God is a righteous judge (2Tim. 4:8). His saving activity is righteous; he does not compromise his own justice in justifying the ungodly (Rom. 3:24–26). The righteousness of God is contrasted with human unrighteousness and wickedness (Rom. 3:5; James 1:20). Since God reigns over creation in righteousness, human conduct should conform to that standard (e.g., Rom. 14:17). Jesus is also noted as righteous (Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14; 1Pet. 3:18; 1John 2:1, 29). He fulfilled righteousness in the absolute sense of demonstrating complete conformity to the nature and will of God (e.g., 1Pet. 3:18). He also fulfilled God’s righteousness in the sense of his saving activity toward humans (e.g., 2Pet. 1:1).
Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’s commandment to the contrary (2:1617), Eve ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. When Adam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete. They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaves were inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with their attempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent, Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
In the midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways that sin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised to put hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of the woman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blow upon the offspring of the woman, the offspring of the woman would defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequate covering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implication is that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adam and Eve, covering their sin.
In one sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holy God satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationship with human beings without compromising his justice? The short answer is: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), who eventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemed them from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought them to Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated on obedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant was the sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided as a means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrifices made for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year to atone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement the high priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies and sprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took a second goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people of Israel, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them on the head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness.... The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barren region; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev. 16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinful people, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longing for God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last, when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it was revealed that he would “save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, John the Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereas both Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to be the obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation (Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13; Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also the Suffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45; cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrath of God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. With his justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify all who are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). What neither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, Jesus Christ did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
After his resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers began proclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus did and calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins” (Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness, they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned against them (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believers continue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal. 5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23). The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the new heaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse (Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
As even this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesis to Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’s plot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative; it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved in order for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Direct Matches
The initiatory ritual of Christianity. This rite is of greatsignificance in connecting the individual both to Christ and to thegreater community of believers. Baptism carries an equal measure ofsymbolism and tradition, evoking a connection between OT covenantalcircumcision and ritual cleansing and NT regeneration and redemption.It is the visible response to the gospel, reflecting the internalresponse to the gospel: the climactic moment in the journey ofreconciliation of the believer with God.
Theword “baptism” (Gk. baptisma) carries with it the senseof washing by dipping (Gk. baptizō); the word can also carry thesense of being overtaken or subsumed, or of joining or entering intoa new way of life. In either sense, a distinct change in therecipient is envisioned. Through baptism, Christians both demonstratetheir desire for and symbolize their understanding of being washedclean of sin; they also proclaim their surrender to and subjugationby Christ. All this intellectual underpinning occurs in what can be adeeply emotional ceremony.
Baptismin the Bible
Theimmediate precursor of Christian baptism was the baptism of Johnthe Baptist (Mark 1:4 pars.), a baptism of repentance for theforgiveness of sins, preparing the hearts of the people for thecoming Messiah. But when Jesus himself was baptized by John to“fulfill all righteousness” (Matt. 3:15) and to allowJesus to identify with sinful humanity, he became the firstfruits ofthe new covenant. John emphasized that his baptism with water wasinferior to the baptism “with the Holy Spirit and fire”that Jesus would bring (Matt. 3:11). Jesus’ disciples continuedJohn’s baptism during his earthly ministry (John 4:1–2).
Baptismwas immediately important in the early church. Jesus commanded thedisciples to “make disciples . . . , baptizing them”(Matt. 28:19). The disciples replaced Judas from among those “whohave been with us the whole time . . . from John’sbaptism” (Acts 1:21–22). Peter’s first sermonproclaims, “Repent and be baptized” (2:38). The apostlesbaptized new believers in Christ immediately (8:12–13; 8:38;9:18; 10:48; 16:15, 33; 18:8; 19:5; 22:16).
Forthe apostle Paul, baptism represents a participation in thecrucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Paul writes, “Don’tyou know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus werebaptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him throughbaptism into death” (Rom. 6:3–4); “In him you were. . . buried with him in baptism, in which you were alsoraised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raisedhim from the dead” (Col. 2:11–12).
Thoughthe NT does not explicitly command baptism (the command in Acts 2:38is understood to be directed toward a specific group), it assumesthat all believers will be baptized (Acts 19:2–3). Theexpectation of baptism is as good as a command, and Christians shouldunderstand baptism as a matter of obedience. Accounts of baptism inActs are always preceded by reports of belief, and new believers areimmediately baptized. Baptism also carries the idea of conveyance: noone self-baptizes; rather, believers baptize others as an initiationinto the family of believers.
BaptismalPractices
Historicallyin the church, the manner of baptism involves the application ofwater to the recipient by pouring, sprinkling, or immersion. Thesepractices vary among Christians, but no one practice has a clearbiblical warrant above the others. Paul, however, appeals tosymbolism in his discussions of baptism. He describes those baptized“into Christ Jesus” as being “baptized into hisdeath,” “buried with him through baptism into death”that they might be raised to a new life “just as Christ wasraised from the dead” (Rom. 6:3–4; see also Col. 2:12).Immersion may be the best vehicle to retain this striking symbolismof Paul.
Thetiming of baptism has caused controversy within the church. Somechurches (especially Baptist) believe that baptism is for those whohave made a conscious decision for Christ—believer’sbaptism. Baptism is an expression of both the change in one’slife and one’s devotion. With this act, the person unites withthe church as well as with Jesus himself. This is a deeply movingexperience for the celebrant, one to be remembered forever. Thecelebrant metaphorically is buried with Christ in order to be raisedup with him. Baptism does not of itself convey salvation but ratheris an act of obedience, and obedience indicates active affirmation ofthe gospel.
Somechurches (e.g., Reformed, Presbyterian) practice infant baptism(paedobaptism). Baptism is at least partly a covenant act similar tocircumcision; by this act the child’s parents announce theirown membership in the body of Christ and their desire that the childbe considered a member as well. Baptism does not convey salvation,but it does convey a type of grace. Entering early adulthood, thechild will be given a chance to affirm his or her faith throughconfirmation. Obviously, the child will have no conscious memory ofthe original baptism, but the child will grow from infancy with theknowledge of having been entered conditionally into the church by hisor her parents. Infant baptism is an act of faith by the parents thatthe child must claim later, at which time some church traditions havea ritual of confirmation. The warrant for infant baptism is thepassages where a “household” or other unspecified groupis baptized (see Acts 2:38; 16:15, 31, 34). Also, Paul seems torelate Christian baptism to OT circumcision (Col. 2:11–12), anevent for the child performed at the parents’ request (Lev.12:3). (See also Infant Baptism)
Advocatesof believer’s baptism also see value in the ceremonialincorporation of infants into the church. These churches offer childdedication, a similar ceremony but without the water component.
Anothersource of debate is the concept of rebaptism. Some churches requirethat prospective members who were baptized as infants be baptizedanew as believing adults. It is claimed that the previous baptism isinvalid, since an infant cannot possess the proper faith. For otherchurches, rebaptism is strictly forbidden as unscriptural.
Notably,while most Christian groups see baptism as fundamental to theirfellowship, many groups also make allowances for baptism received inextraordinary ways. For instance, the Catholic Church allows for“baptism by blood” and “baptism by desire,”where in extreme cases baptism is credited though having never beenperformed. Catholic doctrine also allows for “extraordinaryministers” who may not even be Christians to perform baptism,as long as the intended goal is a valid Christian baptism.
TheFunction of Baptism
Baptismshould not be seen as a saving act; Paul tells a jailer, “Believein the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and yourhousehold” (Acts 16:31). It is later, after the jailer haswashed Paul’s and Silas’s wounds, that the family isbaptized. Paul does write to Titus about salvation, saying, “Hesaved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the HolySpirit” (Titus 3:5). But here Paul is invoking OT imageryrather than NT baptism, as he nowhere uses these terms to refer tobaptism. Peter writes, “And this water symbolizes baptism thatnow saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body butthe pledge of a clear conscience toward God” (1 Pet.3:21). It is not the baptism that saves, nor the washing, but ratherthe working of faith in relationship with God.
Itis a shame that baptism has become a source of division in today’schurches. Paul emphasizes that “we were all baptized by oneSpirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slaveor free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink”(1 Cor. 12:13). Having been baptized into Jesus Christ should bea unifying element among Christians, not a source of contention.
The word “dominion” translates several terms thatexpress power, mastery, rulership, and authority. As the cosmic king,God has deputized humankind as his image bearer to “rule over”creation (Gen. 1:26, 28; Ps. 8:5–6). Human rulership isintended to be a stewardship for God, one of development, notdomination.
Dominionis also found in political might (1Kings 4:24), sometimes inthe possession of Israel’s enemies (Neh. 9:28), and in God’schosen king over creation (Ps. 72:8). There is also the messianicrestoration of dominion (Mic. 4:8), dominion among supernaturalbeings (Eph. 1:21), and the ultimate dominion of Christ over all(Col. 1:15–20). The rule of sin and death is contrasted withthe dominion of grace and resurrection (Rom. 5:14–21; 6:9–14).God’s dominion is his “sovereignty,” both increation and redemption (Dan. 4:34; 1Pet. 4:11; Jude 25).
The common experience/sharing of something with someone else.In the NT, the most common Greek word group to express this idea hasthe root koin- (“common”), with the cognate verbkoinōneō, noun koinōnia, and adjective koinos. But theconcept of fellowship extends well beyond this single word family andfinds expression in a variety of different contexts.
Fellowshipbetween the Members of the Trinity
TheGospel of John makes several claims about the fellowship that themembers of the Trinity have experienced with each other from alleternity. Jesus claims, “I and the Father are one”(10:30) and “It is the Father, living in me, who is doing hiswork” (14:10). Regarding the Holy Spirit, Jesus says, “Hewill glorify me because it is from me that he will receive what hewill make known to you. All that belongs to the Father is mine”(16:14–15). The Son has even shared in the Father’s gloryfrom before the creation of the world (17:5). Within the unity of theGodhead, the individual members experience perfect fellowship as theyshare in the fullness of deity.
Fellowshipbetween Jesus and Outcasts
Duringhis earthly ministry, Jesus modeled God’s love for themarginalized by associating with them. Such fellowship often took theform of sharing meals with outcasts such as tax collectors andsinners (Mark 2:15–17; Luke 5:29–32; 7:36–50;19:1–10), a practice that provoked sharp criticism from thePharisees (Luke 15:1–2). In Luke 15:3–32, Jesus tellsthree parables in response to such criticism. These parables indicatethat his fellowship with sinners demonstrates God’s love forthe lost and the joy that comes from restored fellowship with God.Such table fellowship served as a foretaste of the eschatologicalmessianic banquet, when all of God’s people (Jew and Gentilealike) will eat together in the kingdom of God as the fellowship ofthe forgiven (Matt. 8:11; Luke 13:29–30; Rev. 19:6–9).
Fellowshipbetween Believers and God
Theclose and intimate fellowship that the members of the Trinityexperience with one another is something that Jesus prays for hispeople to experience themselves (John 17:20–26). He asks thatbelievers “may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I amin you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that youhave sent me” (17:21). Just as the Father is in Jesus and Jesusis in the Father, believers are described as being in both the Fatherand the Son. The stated purpose for such fellowship is twofold: thatthe world may know and believe that the Father has sent the Son, andthat the Father loves believers even as he has loved the Son (17:21,23). Central to this fellowship between God and believers is thesharing of the glory that the Father and the Son experience (17:22).Jesus expresses similar truths in John 15:1–11 when he speaksof himself as the true vine and his followers as the branches whomust remain in him because “apart from me you can donothing”(v.5).
Althoughfellowship with God is something that Christ has purchased for hispeople through his death and resurrection, it can be broken by sin inthe believer’s life: “If we claim to have fellowship withhim and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out thetruth” (1John 1:6). When sin does break a believer’sfellowship with God, we are reassured, “If we confess our sins,he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify usfrom all unrighteousness” (1:9). This restoration of fellowshipis based on the work of Jesus to plead our case before theFather(2:1).
Paulfrequently speaks of the believer’s fellowship with Christ,even though he rarely uses the word “fellowship” to speakof this reality. It is God who calls the believer into fellowshipwith Christ (1Cor. 1:9), but such fellowship involves both the“power of his resurrection and participation in his sufferings,becoming like him in his death” (Phil. 3:10). When believerscelebrate the Lord’s Supper, they are participating in the bodyand blood of Christ (1Cor. 10:16–17). Far morefrequently, Paul expresses the concept of fellowship with Christ byhis use of the phrase “with Christ.” Believers have beencrucified, buried, raised, clothed, and seated in the heavenly realmswith Christ (Rom. 6:4–9; 2Cor. 13:4; Gal. 2:20–21;Eph. 2:5–6; Col. 2:12–13; 3:1–4). They also sharein the inheritance that Christ has received from the Father (Rom.8:16–17) and one day will reign with him (2Tim.2:12).
Fellowshipbetween Believers and Others
Thefellowship that believers have with one another is an extension oftheir fellowship with God. John wrote, “We proclaim to you whatwe have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us.And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ”(1John 1:3). Just as walking in darkness falsifies a believer’sclaim to fellowship with God, so also walking in the light isnecessary for fellowship with other believers (1:6–7). Paulstrikes a similar note when he says, “Do not be yoked togetherwith unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have incommon? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? What harmonyis there between Christ and Belial? Or what does a believer have incommon with an unbeliever?” (2Cor. 6:14–15). Thepoint is not to avoid all contact with unbelievers (cf. 1Cor.5:9–10), but rather that the believer is so fundamentallyidentified with Christ that to identify with unbelievers should beavoided.
Becausethey are joined to Christ by faith, believers share a wide variety ofexperiences and blessings with each other. In the broadest sense,they share in the gospel and its blessings (1Cor. 9:23; Phil.1:5–7; Philem. 6; 2Pet. 1:4), especially the Spirit(2Cor. 13:13–14; Phil. 2:1). But the most common sharedexperience is suffering. When believers suffer because of theiridentification with Christ, they are said to share in Christ’ssuffering (Phil. 3:10; 1Pet. 4:13). In addition to thisvertical element, there is a horizontal aspect. Because believers areunited in one body (1Cor. 12:12–13; Eph. 4:4–6),when one believer suffers, the entire body shares in that suffering(2Cor. 1:7; Heb. 10:33; Rev. 1:9).
Fromthe earliest days of the church, believers found very tangible waysto demonstrate that their fellowship was rooted in their common faithin Jesus. Immediately after Pentecost, “they devoted themselvesto the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking ofbread and to prayer.... All the believers weretogether and had everything in common” (Acts 2:42–44).This common experience led believers to voluntarily sell theirpossessions and share with any who had a need (2:45; 4:32). Thismeeting of very practical needs was motivated by a common experienceof God’s abundant generosity in freely giving his Son (Rom.8:32). The self-sacrificial sharing of resources became a staple ofthe early church (Rom. 12:13; Gal. 6:6; 1Tim. 6:18) andprovided an opportunity for Paul to demonstrate the unity of thechurch when he collected money from Gentile churches to alleviate thesuffering of Jewish Christians in Judea (Rom. 15:26–27; 2Cor.8–9).
Conclusion
Biblicalfellowship is not merely close association with other believers. TheNT emphasizes what believers share in Christ rather than whom theyshare it with. True biblical fellowship between believers is anoutworking of their fellowship with God through the gospel.
In the NIV, the term “instrument” is used in theOT strictly with reference to musical instruments of various kinds;in the NT, the term can mean someone or something used as a tool byGod (Acts 9:15; 2 Tim. 2:21) or used for either wickedness orrighteousness (Rom. 6:13). The KJV also uses the term “instrument”for a variety of implements and utensils, including weapons (Gen.49:5), temple furnishings and utensils (Exod. 25:9; Num. 4:12), andfarming implements (2Sam. 24:22; 1Kings 19:21).
A theologically significant concept for the apostle Paul. Heused the Greek word melos (“member” or “body part”)in two contexts. First, Paul identified Christians as members ofChrist’s body (Rom. 12:4–5; 1Cor. 12:27; Eph.5:30). Just as all the members of the human body are critical to itsfunctioning, all Christians, whether apparently significant or not,are critical to the church’s functioning (1Cor.12:12–27). Second, Paul spoke of members of the body asinstruments that could be presented either for good or for evil (Rom.6:13, 19; Col. 3:5). In the non-Christian, these members are home tothe “sinful passions” (Rom. 7:5), and the “law ofsin” within the members can hold prisoner even the Christian(7:23).
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
Slavery and servanthood were part of everyday life in theancient world. There were many different kinds of circ*mstancesthrough which a person might become a slave. Some were coerced intoservitude after being captured in war; others were born into slavery;others served as slaves as a sentence for a crime; still othersserved by personal choice as an apprentice. Slavery was not based onrace. Furthermore, there was an enormous range of social and economicclasses among slaves, from the brutal life of a galley slave to thatof a wealthy servant of a king who might likewise own property andslaves.
Insome cases, manumission, or the freeing of slaves, was possibleduring Roman times. This could be accomplished if the master died orif the master’s will allowed for their freedom, and in somecases slaves could even purchase their own freedom. In the firstcentury AD, there were many such manumitted slaves. Acts 6:9 speaksof a Synagogue of the Freedmen, which probably means that it was madeup of former slaves.
OldTestament
Thereare numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized asfollowing a servant-master model. These included service to themonarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in thetemple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also seeextensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:1–11; Lev.25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concernedwith the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelinesfor their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaveswho had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of sixyears. On the seventh year, known also as the Year of Jubilee, theywere to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent awayempty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s“threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slavesalso had certain rights that gave them special privileges andprotection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, wereallowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays(Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their masterpermanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also,severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death(Exod. 21:20–21).
Someslaves chose freely to stay with their owner. Deuteronomy 15:16–17speaks of a slave who might say to a master, “I do not want toleave you,” out of love for the master and his family. Thiscommitment was sealed by piercing the earlobe of the slave with anawl. This symbolized a lifelong commitment to the master.
NewTestament
Slaverywas very common in the first century AD, and there were manydifferent kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in anextended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they mightchoose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25).Although slavery was a significant part of society in the firstcentury AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery.Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obediencefor slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25;1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21).Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves(Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned bythe apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “thegospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim.1:10–11).
Jesusembodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled therole of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servantpredicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9;52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in theGospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve(Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5).Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the verynature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
Thespecial relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured inthe servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’sletters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses notso much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegianceand honor owed to Christ Jesus.
Theimagery of slavery is also used metaphorically in the NT in both anegative and a positive manner. In Rom. 6 the apostle Paul discusseshow slavery and obedience to former and latter masters is anessential part of the changed Christian life. Prior to knowingChrist, we were “slaves to sin” and obeyed its power(Rom. 6:16–17); after following Christ, we were freed from thepower of sin and death and became “slaves to righteousness”(Rom. 6:18) and “slaves of God” (Rom. 6:22).
Secondary Matches
The following suggestions occured because
Romans 6:1-14
is mentioned in the definition.
Antinomianism, which literally means “opposed to thelaw,” arose as a reaction against legalism, denying the needfor legal or moral restraints. The term itself does not appear inScripture, but the concept can be found in passages such as Rom.6:1–2, where Paul asks, “Shall we go on sinning so thatgrace may increase?” He is referring here to those who claimedthat the grace of God was a license to live without rules orboundaries. Paul answers with one of his strongest objections: “Byno means!” or “May it never be!” He then argues,“We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it anylonger?” Our new life in Christ frees us to live a life ofrighteousness before God; we must not return to slavery to sin (seeGal. 5:1).
Bathing was built into the very structure of the culture ofthe biblical world. Jewish ritual baths, miqwa’ot, were foundthroughout the Mediterranean world in both private homes and publicplaces. Likewise, bathhouses were common in the Greco-Roman landscapeof urban life. Ancient literary and archaeological sources attest tothe traditions of curative bathing throughout the Mediterraneanbasin.
Homerwrote of bathing in warm water as a luxury and part of a hero’swelcome. Greek philosophers describe taking a hot bath as reservedfor the aristocracy. In contrast, the Spartans bathed only in coldwater. The Greeks incorporated full bathing facilities into theirgymnasium programs. It was customary in the Roman Empire for men andwomen to bathe separately. Some of Rome’s extant public bathshave inscriptions indicating separate spaces for the sexes. Some ofthe emperors, however, tolerated mixed bathing.
Inthe OT, bathing is often part of purification rituals. The Israeliteshad cleansing rituals that included bathing in running water (Lev.15:13). In the NT, washing or bathing (baptizing) can be eitherliteral or metaphorical (Luke 12:50; Rom. 6:3–4; 1 Cor.10:2; 12:13; Col. 2:12; Rev. 7:14; 22:14). Baptizing is presented asa symbol of purification from sin (Acts 22:16) or spiritualpollution, and water baptism became the initiation rite for the earlyChristian community. Early Jewish Christian communities had apreference for using the Jewish ritual baths or pools for theirbaptisms because their water was channeled in from natural sources.See also Baptism.
The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.
Terminology
On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”
Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2John1).
Election and Salvation
There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.
However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden”(9:18).
Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”
Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect
Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”
There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.
Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.
Summary
The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.
Terminology
TheNT word for “church” is ekklēsia, which means“gathering, assembly, congregation.” In classical Greekthe term was used almost exclusively for political gatherings. Inparticular, in Athens the word signified the assembling of thecitizens for the purpose of conducting the affairs of the city.Moreover, ekklēsia referred only to the actual meeting, not tothe citizens themselves. When the people were not assembled, theywere not considered to be the ekklēsia. The NT records threeinstances of this secular usage of the term (Acts 19:32, 39, 41).
Themost important background for the Christian use of the term is theLXX (Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, dated c. 250BC), which uses the word in a religious sense about one hundredtimes, almost always as a translation of the Hebrew word qahal. Whileqahal does not indicate a secular gathering (in contrast to ’edah,the typical Hebrew word for Israel’s religious gathering,translated by Greek synagōgē), it does denote Israel’ssacred meetings. This is especially the case in Deuteronomy, whereqahal is linked with the covenant.
Inthe NT, ekklēsia is used to refer to the community of God’speople 109 times (out of 114 occurrences of the term). Although theword occurs in only two Gospel passages (Matt. 16:18; 18:17), it isof special importance in Acts (23 times) and the Pauline writings (46times). It is found 20 times in Revelation and in isolated instancesin James and Hebrews. Three general conclusions can be drawn fromthis usage. First, ekklēsia (in both the singular and theplural) applies predominantly to a local assembly of those whoprofess faith in and allegiance to Christ. Second, ekklēsiadesignates the universal church (Acts 8:3; 9:31; 1 Cor. 12:28;15:9; especially in the later Pauline letters: Eph. 1:22–23;Col. 1:18). Third, the ekklēsia is God’s congregation(1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1).
TheNature of the Church
Thenature of the church is too broad to be exhausted in the meaning ofone word. To capture its significance, the NT authors utilize a richarray of metaphorical descriptions. Nevertheless, there are thosemetaphors that seem to dominate the biblical pictures of the church,five of which call for comment: the people of God, the kingdom ofGod, the eschatological temple of God, the bride of Christ, and thebody of Christ.
Thepeople of God.Essentially, the concept of the people of God can be summed up in thecovenantal phrase: “I will be their God, and they will be mypeople” (see Exod. 6:6–7; 19:5; Lev. 26:9–14; Jer.7:23; 30:22; 32:37–40; Ezek. 11:19–20; 36:22–28;Acts 15:14; 2 Cor. 6:16; Heb. 8:10–12; Rev. 21:3). Thus,the people of God are those in both the OT and the NT eras whor*sponded to God by faith and whose spiritual origin restsexclusively in God’s grace.
Tospeak of the one people of God transcending the eras of the OT andthe NT necessarily raises the question of the relationship betweenthe church and Israel. Modern interpreters prefer not to polarize thematter into an either/or issue. Rather, they talk about the churchand Israel in terms of there being both continuity and discontinuitybetween them.
Continuitybetween the church and Israel. Two ideas establish the fact that thechurch and Israel are portrayed in the Bible as being in a continuousrelationship. First, in the OT the church was present in Israel insome sense. Acts 7:38 suggests this connection when, alluding toDeut. 9:10, it speaks of the church (ekklēsia) in thewilderness. The same idea is probably to be inferred from theintimate association noted earlier existing between the wordsekklēsia and qahal, especially when the latter is qualified bythe phrase “of God.” Furthermore, if the church is viewedin some NT passages as preexistent, then one finds therein theprototype of the creation of Israel (see Exod. 25:40; Acts 7:44; Gal.4:26; Heb. 12:22; Rev. 21:11; cf. Eph. 1:3–14).
Second,Israel in some sense is present in the church in the NT. The many OTnames for Israel applied to the church in the NT establish that fact.Some of those are “Israel” (Gal. 6:15–16; Eph.2:12; Heb. 8:8–10; Rev. 2:14), “a chosen people”(1 Pet. 2:9), “the circumcision” (Rom. 2:28–29;Phil. 3:3; Col. 2:11), “Abraham’s seed” (Rom. 4:16;Gal. 3:29), “the remnant” (Rom. 9:27; 11:5–7), “theelect” (Rom. 11:28; Eph. 1:4), “the flock” (Acts20:28; Heb. 13:20; 1 Pet. 5:2), and “priesthood”(1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10).
Discontinuitybetween the church and Israel. The church, however, is not totallyidentical with Israel; discontinuity also characterizes therelationship. The church, according to the NT, is the eschatological(end-time) Israel incorporated in Jesus Christ and, as such, is aprogression beyond historical Israel (1 Cor. 10:11; 2 Cor.5:14–21). Indeed, significant discontinuity is introduced bythe fact that the church includes Gentiles as members of Israel,without requiring them to convert to Judaism first. Gentiles enter asGentiles. However, a caveat must be issued at this point. Althoughthe church is a progression beyond Israel, it does not seem to be thepermanent replacement of Israel (see Rom. 9–11, esp. 11:25–27).
Thekingdom of God.Many scholars have maintained that the life, death, and resurrectionof Jesus inaugurated the kingdom of God, producing the overlapping ofthe two ages. The kingdom has already dawned but is not yet complete.The first aspect pertains to Jesus’ first coming, and thesecond aspect relates to his second coming. In other words, the ageto come has broken into this age, and now the two existsimultaneously. This background is crucial in ascertaining therelationship between the church and the kingdom of God, because thechurch also exists in the tension that results from the overlappingof the two ages. Accordingly, one may define the church as theforeshadowing of the kingdom. Two ideas flow from this definition:first, the church is related to the kingdom of God; second, thechurch is not equal to the kingdom of God.
Thechurch and the kingdom of God are related. Not until after theresurrection of Jesus does the NT speak with regularity about thechurch. However, there are early signs of the church in the teachingand ministry of Jesus, in both general and specific ways. In general,Jesus anticipated the later official formation of the church in thathe gathered to himself the twelve disciples, who constituted thebeginnings of eschatological Israel—in effect, the remnant.More specifically, Jesus explicitly referred to the church in twopassages: Matt. 16:18–19; 18:17. In the first passage Jesuspromised that he would build his church despite satanic opposition,thus assuring the ultimate success of his mission. The notion of thechurch overcoming the forces of evil coincides with the idea that thekingdom of God will prevail over its enemies and bespeaks theintimate association between the church and the kingdom. The secondpassage relates to the future organization of the church, not unlikethe Jewish synagogue practices of Jesus’ day.
Thechurch and the kingdom of God are not identical. As intimatelyrelated as the church and the kingdom of God are, the NT does notequate the two, as is evident in the fact that the early Christianspreached the kingdom, not the church (Acts 8:12; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23,31). The NT identifies the church as the people of the kingdom (e.g.,Rev. 5:10), not the kingdom itself. Moreover, the church is theinstrument of the kingdom. This is especially clear from Matt.16:18–19, where the preaching of Peter and the church becomethe keys to opening up the kingdom of God to all who would enter.
Theeschatological temple of God.Both the OT and Judaism anticipated the rebuilding of the temple inthe future kingdom of God (e.g., Ezek. 40–48; Hag. 2:1–9;1 En. 90:29; 91:3; Jub. 1:17, 29). Jesus hinted that he wasgoing to build such a structure (Matt. 16:18; Mark 14:58; John2:19–22). Pentecost witnessed to the beginning of thefulfillment of that dream in that when the Spirit inhabited thechurch, the eschatological temple was formed (Acts 2:16–36).Other NT writers also perceived that the presence of the Spirit inthe Christian community constituted the new temple of God (1 Cor.3:16–17; 2 Cor. 6:14–7:1; Eph. 2:19–22; seealso Gal. 4:21–31; 1 Pet. 2:4–10). However,that the eschatological temple is not yet complete is evident in thepreceding passages, especially in their emphasis on the need for thechurch to grow toward maturity in Christ, which will be fullyaccomplished only at the parousia (second coming of Christ). In themeantime, Christians, as priests of God, are to perform theirsacrificial service to the glory of God (Rom. 12:1–2; Heb.13:15; 1 Pet. 2:4–10).
Thebride of Christ.The image of marriage is applied to God and Israel in the OT (seeIsa. 54:5–6; 62:5; Hos. 2:7). Similar imagery is applied toChrist and the church in the NT. Christ, the bridegroom, hassacrificially and lovingly chosen the church to be his bride (Eph.5:25–27). Her responsibility during the betrothal period is tobe faithful to him (2 Cor. 11:2; Eph. 5:24). At the parousia theofficial wedding ceremony will take place, and with it the eternalunion of Christ and his wife will be actualized (Rev. 19:7–9;21:1–2).
Thebody of Christ.The body of Christ as a metaphor for the church is unique to thePauline literature and constitutes one of the most significantconcepts therein (Rom. 12:4–5; 1 Cor. 12:12–27; Eph.4:7–16; Col. 1:18). The primary purpose of the metaphor is todemonstrate the interrelatedness of diversity and unity within thechurch, especially with reference to spiritual gifts. The body ofChrist is the last Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), the new humanity of theend time that has appeared in history. However, Paul’s usage ofthe image, like the metaphor of the new temple, indicates that thechurch, as the body of Christ, still has a long way to gospiritually. It is not yet complete.
Sacraments
Atthe heart of the expression of the church’s faith are thesacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The formersymbolizes entrance into the church, while the latter providesspiritual sustenance for the church.
Baptism.Baptism symbolizes the sinner’s entrance into the church. Threeobservations emerge from the biblical treatment of this sacrament.First, the OT intimated baptism, especially in its association ofrepentance of sin with ablutions (Num.19:18–22; Ps. 51:7; Ezek.36:25; cf. John 3:5). Second, the baptism of John anticipatedChristian baptism. John administered a baptism of repentance inexpectation of the baptism of the Spirit and fire that the Messiahwould exercise (Matt. 3:11 // Luke 3:16). Those who accept Jesusas Messiah experience the baptism of fire and judgment (which may bean allusion to undergoing the great tribulation/messianic woes thatlead into the messianic kingdom). Third, the early church practicedbaptism in imitation of the Lord Jesus (Matt. 3:13–17 //Mark 1:9–11 // Luke 3:21–22; see also John 1:32–34;cf. Matt. 28:19; Acts 2:38; 8:16; Rom. 6:3–6; 1 Cor.1:13–15; Gal. 3:27; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:21). Thesepassages demonstrate some further truths about baptism: baptism isintimately related to faith in God; baptism identifies the personwith the death and resurrection of Jesus; baptism incorporates theperson into the community of believers.
Lord’sSupper.The other biblical sacrament is the Lord’s Supper. This ritesymbolizes Christ’s spiritual nourishment of his church as itcelebrates the sacred meal. Two basic points emerge from the biblicaldata concerning the Lord’s Supper. First, it was instituted byChrist (Matt. 26:26–29; Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20;1 Cor. 11:23–25), probably as an adaptation of thePassover meal. If that is the case, then, Jesus will have introducedtwo changes into the Passover seder: he replaced the unleavened breadwith a reference to his body being given for us on the cross; hereplaced the cup of redemption with a reference to his shed blood onthe cross, the basis of the new covenant. Second, the early churchpracticed the Lord’s Supper probably weekly, in conjunctionwith the love feast (see 1 Cor. 11:18–22; cf. Jude 12). Atwofold meaning is attached to the Lord’s Supper by the NTauthors. First, it involves participation in Christ’s salvation(Luke 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24–25), and in two ways:participating in the Lord’s Supper looks back to the death ofJesus, in which the believer now shares; participating in the Lord’sSupper looks forward to Christ’s return, the culmination pointof the believer’s salvation. Second, the Lord’s Supperinvolves identification with the body of Christ, the community offaith (1 Cor. 10:16–17; 11:27–33).
Worship
Theultimate purpose of the church is to worship God through Christ andin the power of the Holy Spirit (see, e.g., Rev. 4–5). Theearly church first worshiped in the Jerusalem temple (Acts 2:46; 3:1;5:42) as well as in the synagogue (Acts 22:19; cf. John 9:22; James2:2). At the same time, and into the near future, believers met inhomes for worship (Acts 1:13; 2:46; 5:42; cf. Rom. 16:15; Col. 4:15;Philem. 2; 2 John 10; 3 John 1, 6). Although many JewishChristians no doubt continued to worship God on the Sabbath, theestablished time for the church’s worship came to be Sunday,the day of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10). Theearly church most probably patterned its order of worship after thesynagogue service: praise in prayer (Acts 2:42, 47; 3:1; 1 Thess.1:2; 5:17) and in song (1 Cor. 14:26; Phil. 2:6–11; Col.1:15–20), the expounding of Scripture (Acts 2:42; 6:4; Col.4:16; 1 Thess. 2:13; 1 Tim. 4:13), and almsgiving to theneedy (Acts 2:44–45; 1 Cor. 16:1–2; 2 Cor. 8–9;James 2:15–17).
Serviceand Organization
Fiveobservations emerge from the NT regarding the service andorganization of the early church. First, the ministry of the churchcenters on its usage of spiritual gifts, which are given to believersby God’s grace and for his glory as well as for the good ofothers (Rom. 12:3; Eph. 4:7–16). Second, every believerpossesses a gift of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7; Eph. 4:7). Third,it is through the diversity of the gifts that the body of Christmatures and is unified (Rom. 12:4; 1 Cor. 12:12–31; Eph.4:17–18). Fourth, although there was organized leadership inthe NT church, including elders (1 Tim. 3:1–7 [also called“pastors” and “bishops”; see Acts 20:17, 28;1 Pet. 5:1–4]) and deacons (1 Tim. 3:8–13),there does not seem to have been a gap between the “clergy”and the “laity” in the church of the first century;rather, those with the gift of leadership are called to equip all thesaints for the work of the ministry (Eph. 4:7–16). Fifth,spiritual gifts are to be exercised in love (1 Cor. 13).
The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.
Terminology
On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”
Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2John1).
Election and Salvation
There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.
However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden”(9:18).
Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”
Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect
Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”
There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.
Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.
Summary
The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.
The choice or selection of a person or group, especially God’s determination of who will be saved.
Terminology
On occasion, the language of being “elect” is used as a description of Christ, or perhaps even a title. Isaiah, in one of his Servant Songs, gives a description that is probably best taken as a veiled reference to Christ in his unique relationship with the Father: “Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen [or ‘elect’] one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations” (Isa. 42:1). There is similar usage in the NT, where Jesus is described in 1Pet. 2:6 (using a quotation from Isa. 28:16): “For in Scripture it says: ‘See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen [or ‘elect’] and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.’ ”
Many times the word “elect” is used in Scripture as a synonym for believers. For example, Jesus speaks of the future time when “he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other” (Matt. 24:31). Similarly, Peter addresses his first letter “to God’s elect” (1Pet. 1:1). John does something similar in his second letter, addressed to “the lady chosen by God [KJV, RSV: “elect lady”] and to her children, whom I love in the truth” (2John1).
Election and Salvation
There is more to this terminology, though, than simply a descriptive name for Christ or God’s people. Other passages are more explanatory in nature and imply a definite and active place for God’s involvement in the salvation process. For example, Peter continues on in his introduction to his first letter with a description of the elect as those “who have been chosen [KJV: ‘elect’] according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood” (1Pet. 1:2). Here there is the key question of how we should understand the role of God’s foreknowledge in the expression “chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father.” Some argue that this is simply telling us that God is able to look forward and know ahead of time who will exercise faith and be saved, so salvation is simply based on a purely human decision after all.
However, Rom. 9 suggests otherwise. This chapter, perhaps more than any other, sheds light on God’s election of his people. Paul is in the process of explaining how God’s plan of redemption (which he has been developing in Rom. 1–8) applies to his own Jewish people. If the gospel is really as powerful as Paul claims, why has it produced so little fruit among God’s own covenant people, the Jews? Paul answers, “It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel” (9:6). Then, in the following verses, Paul explains what he means by “not all Israel are Israel.” Not every child of Abraham is a child of faith (9:7–13). The promise has come only through Isaac, and not through Abraham’s other sons, Ishmael and the six sons of Keturah (see Gen. 25:1). Similarly, the line of promise and blessing does not involve all of Isaac and Rebekah’s children either, but only Jacob and not Esau (9:10–13). Here Paul explains, “Before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls” (9:11–12). In support of this conclusion, Paul quotes from Mal. 1:2–3: “Just as it is written: ‘Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated’ ” (9:13). The bottom line, according to Paul, is not one’s ancestry at all, but God’s own choice. God tells Moses in Exod. 33:19, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (quoted in Rom. 9:15). Paul gives his summary of election: “It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy” (9:16). He rests his case with the classic OT illustration of God’s hardening of Pharaoh (9:17) before concluding, “Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden”(9:18).
Romans 9 is not an isolated passage of Scripture. The apostle John says much the same of Jesus’ ministry, and how salvation is specifically to all “those who believed in his name”; to them “he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God” (John 1:12–13). The last part of this passage is key: salvation ultimately depends not upon “natural descent” or one’s human ancestry (including whether one is Jewish or not), nor upon “human decision” (including any and all acts of the human will), nor upon a “husband’s will” (a more difficult expression that probably refers to the decisions of others in the family), but solely and ultimately only on being “born of God.”
Hardening of Hearts and the Nonelect
Certainly, there is a mystery in all of this. There is no easy way to understand the negative process of the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart or to explain the mechanics of the positive process of election. Scripture often describes God himself as the one who has hardened the hearts of various individuals. In Exod. 4:21, for example, God says to Moses, “I will harden [Pharaoh’s] heart so that he will not let the people go.” Other times, Scripture is less clear and simply tells us that “Pharaoh’s heart became hard” (Exod. 7:13). Then there are still other times when Pharaoh himself is described as being actively involved in this process of hardening his own heart, such as “when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and would not listen to Moses and Aaron” (Exod. 8:15). Undoubtedly, the best way to understand this is to see a negative response such as the hardening of a person’s heart as a combination of the active will of fallen human beings and the mysterious workings of a sovereign God. In a similar way, both salvation and spiritual growth are other spiritual realities that also involve the mysterious combination of God’s direct involvement in people’s lives and the necessity of their own human response. Paul captures this tension in Phil. 2:12–13: “Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose.”
There is also the question of the nonelect, sometimes put in terms of “reprobation” or “double predestination.” If God is actively involved in the positive act of bringing human beings into a proper relationship with himself in salvation, is he actively involved equally in choosing those who will never respond in faith and will suffer an eternity of judgment apart from him? Again, Christians are divided, and simplistic overgeneralizations do little to advance our understanding of this topic. Those who give precedence to God’s sovereignty in their understanding of the process of salvation usually see a greater involvement of God in the decisions of those who do not respond in faith; those who emphasize human involvement in salvation will also emphasize human decision in those who do not respond.
Those who emphasize God’s sovereignty in this mystery of the faith lean toward the Calvinistic or Reformed end of the scale. They tend also to emphasize the total depravity of humanity: the notion not that people are as bad as they can possibly be, but simply that sin has tainted every area of the mind, will, and emotions, making a positive turning to God, apart from God’s grace, humanly impossible. They also emphasize the definite atonement, the doctrine that Christ died specifically for the elect. On the other hand, those who emphasize human involvement, often called “Arminians,” tend to emphasize the importance of human free will in order to create a sense of responsibility for one’s decisions. They also emphasize an unlimited atonement, the doctrine that Christ died potentially for anyone and everyone.
Summary
The proper balance in Scripture seems to involve both God’s sovereignty and human involvement. Peter captures some of this need for balance: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble” (2Pet. 1:10). Election is ultimately God’s work, but at the same time there is a human involvement in it. Charles Spurgeon’s illustration seems appropriate here. Human will and predestination are like the two rails on a railroad track: everywhere we look they are separate and distinct and thus irreconcilable; yet it is only off in the distance (really in the mind of God himself) that these two complementary truths come together in their perfect resolution. There is no question that “elect” and “election” are biblical terms; the key question is how to understand this difficult topic and to work out all the logical implications in terms of sharing the gospel with others in a meaningful and appropriate manner.
The Bible contains two kinds of statements related to properconduct. Some of them describe the nature of God, the sort of worldhe created, and what he has done for particular groups of people. Italso contains statements telling us what we ought to do, both ascreatures of this God and, in some instances, as the uniquebeneficiaries of his redemptive activity. Consequently, the Biblesets forth a moral viewpoint or ethical system, supported by reasonsthat justify its content and urgency. The writers of Scripture werenot moral philosophers, outlining their position in technical detail;nevertheless, they intended to reveal what pleases our God andSavior, so that the saints are “thoroughly equipped for everygood work” (2Tim. 3:16–17). The Bible, therefore,is the foundational resource for moral discernment, the definitivestatement of what Christians must do and who they must become.
TheSources of Moral Knowledge
Scriptureidentifies two sources of moral knowledge. First, all human beingshave the law of God “written on their hearts” (Rom.2:15). We have a conscience, a God-given awareness of right and wrongthat acquits or convicts us, depending on how we respond to it. Thefall of humankind has damaged this source of knowledge, and ourconsciences can become “seared” through chronicdisobedience and doctrinal treason (1Tim. 4:2). We do not,therefore, see infallibly what our duties are. Nevertheless, theapostle Paul argues that every human being knows enough of God’slaw—and indeed, enough about his nature as God—toeliminate every defense on judgment day (Rom. 1:18–20). No onewill be able to say to God in that hour, “I had no idea who youwere and no hint of what you expected ofme.”
Second,as noted above, we have the Bible as a source of knowledge, this onebeing fully adequate and sufficiently clear to guide our choices.Knowing Scripture is necessary for Christian ethics because it offersa high-definition view of what conscience can (even in its bestmoments) scarcely grasp. The Bible proclaims not only what the churchmust do, often in straightforward, concrete terms, but also (atleast, in many cases) why God’s will has its particular contentand why obedience is an emergency, not a safely deferred, improvementproject. The Bible does not, and really could not, answer everyethical question put to it in unambiguous detail. New technologiesand cultural shifts have created dilemmas unimagined in the firstcentury or any previous age. But the church can be assured that afaithful reading of and response to Scripture will, by the grace ofGod, please him even today, whatever our particular circ*mstances.
TheLogic of Biblical Morality
Themoral teaching of Scripture has an identifiable structure consistingof duties and final objectives. When we obey God’scommandments, which is our duty, his ultimate goals or objectives increating us are realized. In this sense, biblical morality iscomplete and informative compared to systems derived from otherworldviews. It explains what life is all about, but also what we mustdo from day to day. This entire picture emerges from Scripturebecause its theological statements are always practically applied andnever presented with merely theoretical interest.
Theobjectives of biblical morality.The objectives of an ethical system are its final ends or purposes:the results that obedience is supposed to yield. In the Bible, twoobjectives have this ultimate significance, one being the anticipatedside effect of the other.
Toglorify God.The biblical writers proclaim the spectacular goodness of God. He ismaximally excellent in all ways as the Creator, including wisdom,power, justice, and love. He is the holy God who, almost in spite ofthat fact, loves us and gave his Son, Jesus, to suffer for our sinsso that we might live eternally in his presence. In these respects,God stands alone, not simply in experience but necessarily so. No oneever has, and no one ever could, be like him. Thus, the finalobjective of all human striving must be to glorify this God—toknow him, to praise him, and to value what he values. Our actionsmust testify to his excellence, honoring him and encouraging othersto do likewise. Obedience treasures what God treasures, shuns what heabhors, and allows his power to work in our lives, causing us to livein unity with our fellow believers. These patterns of behavior definewhat it means to glorify God.
Tobe happy in God’s presence.The second goal or objective of biblical morality is to be happy inways that are proper for God’s creatures. In this sense, theChristian system of ethics differs from moral theories that eitherreject happiness altogether, viewing it as an unworthy goal, or elsereduce it to a merely practical necessity—that is, we sinnersneed our incentives. On the contrary, the God of Scripture plainlydesires our happiness and often presents himself as the final sourceof it when calling his people to obedience. This tendency followsfrom the perfect goodness of God and his freedom in creating allthings. He did not have to make anything else, but he did so; andbecause he has no needs, his purposes must have been selfless ratherthan selfish. He created in order to give rather than to get, and thevery best he desires for any of us is the happiness that results fromour glorifying him together, as one body in Christ. Likewise, then,biblical morality differs from ethical systems that make humanhappiness an intrinsic good, so that any means to it is acceptable.God wants us to be happy, but our happiness must come from bringinghim glory. All other forms of happiness are deceptive and transitory.The heavenly scenes of the book of Revelation show the church whathappiness God has in store for them if they overcome the trials ofthis life (so, e.g., Rev. 4–5; 7; 21–22; cf. 1Cor.2:9; Heb. 12:2).
Themeans of biblical morality.Not surprisingly, the Bible also shows us how to glorify God—howto reflect his majesty in our daily lives, how to praise him, and howto value what he values. Within the whole of this teaching, severalmajor themes can be discerned, five leading examples of which appearbelow, allowing some overlap between them.
Trustingin God’s promises.Biblical faith is the confidence that God will do for us what he haspromised. We believe that he can and will meet our needs and notallow us to endure pointless suffering. When we trust him, weproclaim his greatness and acknowledge our own dependence upon him.Both Rom. 4 and Heb. 11 make this point in ways that reflect upon OThistory with an application to the present Christian life. The gospelis a promise concerning the death, burial, and resurrection ofChrist; and faith assures us that God will reckon these events to ouraccount. Conversely, we often violate God’s commandmentsbecause we doubt that he will give us what we need when we need it(so, e.g., Abraham’s capitulation to Sarah in Gen. 16, with itscorresponding negative results).
Keepingholiness and impurity separated.God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, morally perfect Creator of theuniverse. All things depend on him for their existence, and he isextreme both in his commitment to justice and his desire to love.Consequently, God’s creatures encounter him as “holy,”as the ominously transcendent or dangerously perfect deity. He standsalone, apart from everything else, and life in his presence cannotentail business as usual. The shorthand way of expressing this dutyis to say that we ourselves must be holy, as he is holy, by shunningall forms of impurity. In this way, for example, the ancientIsraelites prepared themselves to enter Yahweh’s presence andgave him public honor (Lev. 11:44; 19:2; Ps. 24:3–4; Isa.6:1–5; cf. 1Pet. 1:15–16).
InScripture, the distinction between the pure and the impure, or theholy and the unholy, is sometimes intrinsic and sometimespedagogical. Breaking any of the Ten Commandments makes oneintrinsically impure. It is always evil, everywhere, for anyone tohave other gods, make idols, and disrespect parents. It is evil tolie, steal, and murder. Even breaking the Sabbath is wrong if itexpresses unbelief in God’s ability and willingness to provide.But some lines between purity and impurity—or, in other cases,just between the sacred and the common—seem to be drawn by Godfor instructional purposes only. They do not separate good from evilas such, but they compel the Israelites to “practice Yahweh’spresence” by honoring boundaries imposed on domestic life. Itis not evil to eat pork, but doing that is forbidden in the OT andpermitted in the NT (Lev. 11:7; Mark 7:19). It is not evil to wearblended cloth, but doing that is forbidden in the OT and passed overin the NT (Lev. 19:19). Therefore, as suggested, Levitical rules ofthis kind must have had some instrumental purpose, serving anobjective beyond themselves. They impose the holiness of Yahweh oneveryday choices, as the Holy Spirit now presses the claims of Godupon his church. This separation of impurity and holiness is, in anycase, a constant theme in the OT, and it carries over into the NT aswell, where it informs the question “What must I do to besaved?” (cf. Acts 16:30).
ImitatingGod/Christ.The biblical writers also construe the moral life as an imitation ofGod and/or Christ, especially when the virtues of mercy, humility,and endurance are at stake. In the OT, Yahweh’s behavior towardpeople becomes the standard for Israel’s own conduct. So, forexample, he says, “But let the one who boasts boast about this:that they have the understanding to know me, that I am the Lord, whoexercises kindness, justice and righteousness on earth, for in theseI delight” (Jer. 9:24). In the NT, similar inferences appear,as when Jesus says, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they willbe called children of God” (Matt. 5:9), the son being one whofollows in his father’s footsteps. We must love our enemies, sothat we may be “children of (our) Father in heaven”(Matt. 5:44–45). We must “be perfect,” as he isperfect (Matt. 5:48). Jesus commands his disciples to wash oneanother’s feet, after his own example (John 13:14–15).They must love each other as he has loved them (John 15:12). The newcommandment to love one another, following the Lord’s example,puts on display his character and their own relationship to him(13:34–35). Jesus prays that his disciples will be “one,”just as the Father and the Son are one (17:22). Paul’s hymn inPhil. 2:5–11 serves this purpose: we must imitate the humilitythat surrendered all, even to the point of crucifixion. Hebrews12:1–2 holds up Christ as one who “for the joy set beforehim endured the cross, scorning its shame,” resulting in hisglory.
Livingout our unique identity.Scripture defines the moral ideal for all persons, whoever they are,because its perspective is not relativistic. Murder, idolatry, andlying are not wrong for some and right for others. Nevertheless, mostof the Bible’s moral teaching has a target audience, so that itoften contains inferences to this effect: “You shall do X (ordoing X is urgent for you), either (a)because you belong to Godin a special way or (b)because he has done this special thingfor you.” In the OT, the target audience is Israel; in the NT,the corresponding group is the church. In both Testaments, however,the same ethical particularism operates, thereby giving the moralexhortations of Paul and Peter, to cite two clear examples, arecognizably “Jewish” structure or theme.
Thelinkage between gift and task, or supernatural identity and behavior,is the basic structure of the Sinai covenant itself. The text movesfrom prologue, “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out ofEgypt,” to moral exhortation, beginning with, “You shallhave no other gods before me” (Exod. 20:1–3; Deut.5:6–7). Echoes of this prologue also occur frequently in the OTas motive clauses. God will say, in effect, “You shall do X,for I am the Lord your God,” or “You shall not do Y, forI am the Lord your God who brought you out of Egypt.” In somecases, the motive clause identifies the people themselves, as in,“For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord yourGod has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth tobe his people, his treasured possession” (Deut. 7:6). Or again,“You are the children of the Lord your God. Do not cutyourselves or shave the front of your heads for the dead, for you area people holy to the Lord your God. Out of all the peoples on theface of the earth, the Lord has chosen you to be his treasuredpossession” (Deut. 14:1–2). In some cases, God refers tothe people’s unique condition to shame them, as in, “WhenIsrael was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.But the more they were called, the more they went away from me”(Hos. 11:1–2). Loyalty was especially urgent, given Israel’sexperience of God’s particular love.
Inthe NT, the mandate to live out one’s special identity appearsoften, especially (though not exclusively) in the writings of Pauland Peter. In Rom. 6 those who have been emancipated from sin mustresist its waning influence. In Rom. 8 those who are under the HolySpirit’s new management must walk in accordance with him andshun the mind-set of the flesh. The Corinthians have become anunleavened batch of dough; therefore, they must “Get rid of theold yeast,” which tolerates extraordinary sin (1Cor. 5).The members of Christ’s one body are to function as one newhumanity (1Cor. 12:12–31). If the Galatians live by theSpirit, they must also walk by the Spirit (Gal. 5:25). Peter tellshis readers to love one another because they have been “bornagain” of “imperishable seed” (1Pet.1:22–23). They are a “chosen race,” a “royalpriesthood,” and a “holy nation”; therefore, theymust proclaim his excellence and abstain from carnal passions (1Pet.2:9–11). Jesus himself says that because he is the vine and weare the branches, we must abide in him (John 15:1–11). In allthese cases, the target audience has a special relationship to Godthat imposes on them corresponding duties or priorities, so that theyreflect his holiness, value what he values, and attain the goals thathe has set before them.
Livingin unity with one another.The first sin separated God from humankind and damaged all otherrelationships (Gen. 3). From that point onward, Adam and Eve wouldlive in tension (Gen. 3:16), and their son Cain kills his brotherAbel (Gen. 4:8). Disunity results from sin; and in some cases, Godscatters sinners as judgment on their wickedness (e.g., Gen. 11:1–9;1Kings 11). It is “good and pleasant” when “God’speople live together in unity” (Ps. 133:1), and obedience to OTteaching would make them do so. Nevertheless, sin stands betweenYahweh and his people, and it stands between one Israelite andanother. Disunity, in all these dimensions, is the unfinishedbusiness of the OT story.
TheNT presents unity as both an effect and a duty (or a gift and a task)of the new life in Christ. We are one in Christ, and we must live inunity of fellowship with one another. Jews and Gentiles—indeed,people from all walks of life—become one body, a new kind ofpeople, defined by relationships that are “thicker than blood,”so to speak, as blood is thicker than water. Paul, as the apostle tothe Gentiles, enforces this theme throughout his letters, so that hisexhortations concentrate on the church, in the first instance, ratherthan the individual. Christians must display the social virtues oflove and humility, resisting selfish ambition and pride, both ofwhich separate believer from believer and each from the head of thechurch, who is Christ. Romans and Ephesians make a positive case forChristian unity among Jews and Gentiles, while Philippians (perhaps,in a broader sense, also Galatians and Colossians) confronts adivisive tendency. The essential vice denounced in 1–2Corinthiansis arrogant grandstanding, which rejects Paul’s “messageof the cross” (1Cor. 1:18) and subdivides the church intocults of personality. Worldly forces are centrifugal, leading us awayfrom one another and into competition for influence, wealth, andpublic honor. In contrast, the Holy Spirit’s force iscentripetal, creating unity where no one would expect it and leadingeach person to self-sacrifice so that others in the body of Christmight be built up in him.
Human Freedom and Divine Freedom
The concept of freedom has three aspects, the first one being legal, or forensic. We are free to watch television, visit Alabama, and collect stamps. In other words, we may do these things because no law forbids them, and no forces deter us. The second aspect is potential, by which we are free to do something if we can actually do it, apart from the question of legality. In this sense, one is free to lift ten pounds but not ten thousand pounds. The third aspect is psychological, meaning that persons are free who can make up their own minds, unaffected by forces that flatly determine what they think and desire. Most people, therefore, enjoy substantial freedom, defined in these three ways. They can and may do all sorts of things, and they are mentally stable. Nevertheless, human freedom is relative, not absolute. We are not God.
God’s freedom differs from our own at all three levels described above. First, God makes the rules (forensic). Second, he has the power to do whatever he likes (potential). He always reigns and never is subject to anyone or anything. Likewise, third, although God cannot violate his own logical principles, no external forces determine what he thinks and does (psychological). Consequently, God is absolutely free, and human beings are not. We lack God’s power and knowledge, and we must live by his rules. In fact, even our thoughts and desires are shaped by external factors, all of which trace back to God himself. He fashions us in our mother’s womb, and he sovereignly ordains our life experiences, the very ones that affect our desires and character (Ps. 139). Thus, our personality types and preferences are assigned to us by circ*mstance, and we act upon them in a mildly deterministic way. Of course, the biblical writers do not regard these factors as operating coercively, so that we make no actual choices in what we approve, decide, and become. Otherwise, God would not bother to reveal himself and his will for our lives. We are not rigidly preprogrammed agents; but then again, we do not have God’s own kind of liberty.
Freedom and Determinism
Some critics of biblical theism might complain that a little determinism, in this sense, goes a long way toward depersonalizing human beings. If we live in the Christian world, the concern is, we must frankly and only refer to the prior causes of our actions and ignore their supposed rationales, since those causes threaten to override all other considerations. But some kind of determinism plays a role in any worldview that allows human behavior to be even fallibly predictable. A shallow rut is still a rut that we are in, and no plausible worldview can dodge this fact of experience. Furthermore, some worldviews leave no room at all for free human choices, even in the qualified sense that Christianity implies. Materialism (or naturalism) would fit this description because it reduces all events, including mental ones, to relentless physical processes. Within that system, human beings can no more choose to act than iron chooses to rust. It is no strike against a worldview that it entails some sort of determinism; the question is, rather, whether it leaves room for anything else.
In one sense, however, the biblical writers construe all of us as slaves. We live under the immediate (not ultimate) reign of sin and death, and we have been doing so ever since the events of Gen. 3. Joshua presupposes this sort of problem in telling the Israelites, “You are not able to serve the Lord,” never mind their vows to do so (Josh. 24:19). In Ps. 51:5 David confesses, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.” Accordingly, Jeremiah says, “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?” (Jer. 17:9). One could argue that humanity’s captivity to sin is a background theme of the entire OT, and even one of its overall lessons. The apostle Paul, however, actually uses the human institution of slavery to illustrate how desperate the sinner’s condition really is outside of Christ (Rom. 5–6). The unbeliever, though able to choose not to do evil in any particular case, cannot be righteous before God. The believer can still choose to sin—this side of glory—but will not do so habitually and unrepentantly. Using the terms introduced above, we might say that unregenerate persons lack the potential and psychological freedom to please God consistently. They will not desire to do so, and they will not succeed, whatever their transient desires are. The believer enjoys both kinds of freedom, relative to the lost person, but not absolutely. Glorification itself must and will consolidate the change.
Religious Liberty
Finally, the Christian view of salvation requires us to affirm “religious” liberty, which is a legal idea. We do not support laws that push people into churches and out of mosques and temples, because we believe that adults should make these choices voluntarily. Indeed, one cannot receive Christ in any other way, because a coerced decision involves no actual trust in him and confidence in what he promises. Moreover, the Bible says that God himself enables the believer to trust Christ, and he does so through the preaching of his word (Rom. 10:14–15; 1Cor. 1:21; Eph. 2:1–10). Arm-twisting has no place within this framework, given its attempt to manipulate what the Holy Spirit effects. Only on the day of judgment will God impose his will on humanity coercively (Phil. 2:10–11). Thus, while every person has the duty to obey God’s laws (Rom. 1–2), and though rejecting Christ compounds the sinner’s guilt (Heb. 2:2–3), we have no biblical warrant to believe that the church has God’s blessing to evangelize with red tape and rifles.
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
In Christian theology, the Third Person of the Trinity. Theusage derives from the NT, in which the divine Spirit is treated asan independent person who is instrumental in salvation and is worthyof the praise accorded to both the Father and the Son (John 14:16–23;Rom. 8:26–27; 1Pet. 1:2).
OldTestament
Thescarcity of the phrase “Holy Spirit” in the OT (only inPs. 51:11; Isa. 63:10–11) does not imply lack of interest orimportance. While it should be recognized that in the OT the personof the Holy Spirit receives nothing like the systematic reflectionfound in the NT, when one includes correlative terms, such as “Spiritof God,” “my Spirit,” “wind,” or“breath,” it is apparent that OT writers attributed greatsignificance to God’s Spirit. Thus, the Spirit was at work inthe beginning of creation (Gen. 1:2). Adam and Eve are uniquely givenlife by the breath of God (Gen. 2:7). The Spirit enables the buildingof the tabernacle (Exod. 31:3), gives voice to the message of theprophets (Num. 11:29; cf. 2Pet. 1:21), empowers Israel’sleaders (1Sam. 16:13), and provides access to God’spresence (Ps. 51:11). Yet in all this, the work of the Spirit in theOT is sporadic, occasional, and localized. Thus, the prophets longfor a new age when God’s people will more perfectly enjoy theSpirit’s presence (Isa. 32:15; 44:3; 61:1; Joel 2:28).
NewTestament
TheSpirit in the ministry of Christ.The NT views the OT prophetic hope for the Spirit as fulfilled in andthrough Jesus Christ (Luke 4:18–21). The unique relationshipbetween God’s Holy Spirit and the person and work of Jesusexplains the systemic reflection that the Holy Spirit receives in theNT. This is signaled at the very beginning of Jesus’ life, whenthe Holy Spirit “comes upon” Mary, overshadowing her with“the power of the Most High” (1:35). Similarly, at thestart of Jesus’ public ministry, the Holy Spirit “descendedon him” at baptism (3:22). This anointing by the Spiritinitiates and empowers Jesus’ public ministry, from hispreaching, to his miraculous works, to his perfect obedience (Luke4:14–18; John 3:34; Acts 10:38). Even his sacrificial death isaccomplished by the power of the Holy Spirit (Heb. 9:14).
Significantly,just as the Holy Spirit empowered the life and death of Jesus, so toois the Spirit responsible for his resurrection and characteristic ofhis glorious reign. Death is not a defeat for Jesus: he is“vindicated by the Spirit” (1Tim. 3:16), “appointedthe Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead”(Rom. 1:4; cf. 1Pet. 3:18). Furthermore, at his resurrection,Jesus comes into a new phase of full and perfect possession of theeternal Spirit as the reward for his obedience. So complete is thisunion that Paul at one point claims that “the Lord is theSpirit” (2Cor. 3:17).
TheSpirit in the church and the believer.The church and its members are the immediate beneficiaries ofChrist’s spiritual fullness. Since Jesus is now a “life-givingspirit” through his resurrection and ascension (1Cor.15:45), he is able to fulfill the promise of Spirit baptism (Luke3:16). This baptism takes place in the outpouring of the Spirit atPentecost, which marks the birth of the NT church. The apostles,illuminated by the Holy Spirit, provide true and powerful testimonyabout Jesus (John 16:4–15), testimony that serves as thechurch’s foundation and principal tradition (Eph. 2:20). Thework of the Spirit continues within the church in the postapostolicage, uniting its members in Christ for God’s holy purpose (Eph.2:22).
Thissame outpouring of the Holy Spirit is the salvation of individualbelievers. Believers receive the Spirit by faith (Gal. 3:14). TheSpirit in turn unites them to Christ and all his benefits (Gal. 3:2;Eph. 1:3), including his life (Heb. 4:15–16), suffering (Phil.1:29; 1Pet. 4:14), death (Rom. 6:3), resurrection (Rom. 6:5),justification (Rom. 4:25), and glorious reign in heaven (Phil. 3:20).These benefits, though undoubtedly perfected and consummated only atChrist’s return (Phil. 1:6), are characteristic of believers’present experience, enjoyed now because the Spirit dwells within themas the “firstfruits” of the harvest to come (Rom. 8:23;cf. Gal. 2:19–20). This indwelling of the Spirit results in newbirth and new creation (2Cor. 5:17), a newness identified withthe life that Christ received in his resurrection (Rom. 8:11).
Forthis reason, believers are urged to further the work of the Spirit intheir lives until the bodily resurrection of all God’s people.They are to cultivate the “fruit of the Spirit” (Gal.5:22), and they are correspondingly warned not to “grieve theHoly Spirit” (Eph. 4:30). Furthermore, since new life isinitiated by the Spirit (John 3:6–8), Christians are to remainin that Spirit, not turning aside in reliance on vain and uselessprinciples (Gal. 3:1–5). Conversely, they are to be “filledwith the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18), putting off the old person andputting on the new (4:22). This filling grounds every aspect of thebeliever’s life, from obedience, to worship, to the hope ofresurrection. The Spirit, in uniting believers to all the riches ofChrist and his resurrection, is therefore central in the work ofsalvation. See also Spirit.
There are few subjects more prominent in the Bible than sin;hardly a page can be found where sin is not mentioned, described, orportrayed. As the survey that follows demonstrates, sin is one of thedriving forces of the entire Bible.
Sinin the Bible
OldTestament.Sin enters the biblical story in Gen. 3. Despite God’scommandment to the contrary (2:16–17), Eve ate from the tree ofthe knowledge of good and evil at the prompting of the serpent. WhenAdam joined Eve in eating the fruit, their rebellion was complete.They attempted to cover their guilt and shame, but the fig leaveswere inadequate. God confronted them and was unimpressed with theirattempts to shift the blame. Judgment fell heavily on the serpent,Eve, and Adam; even creation itself was affected (3:17–18).
Inthe midst of judgment, God made it clear in two specific ways thatsin did not have the last word. First, God cryptically promised toput hostility between the offspring of the serpent and that of thewoman (Gen. 3:15). Although the serpent would inflict a severe blowupon the offspring of the woman, the offspring ofthe womanwould defeat the serpent. Second, God replaced the inadequatecovering of the fig leaves with animal skins (3:21). The implicationis that the death of the animal functioned as a substitute for Adamand Eve, covering their sin.
InGen. 4–11 the disastrous effects of sin and death are on fulldisplay. Not even the cataclysmic judgment of the flood was able toeradicate the wickedness of the human heart (6:5; 8:21). Humansgathered in rebellion at the tower of Babel in an effort to make aname for themselves and thwart God’s intention for them toscatter across the earth (11:1–9).
Inone sense, the rest of the OT hangs on this question: How will a holyGod satisfy his wrath against human sin and restore his relationshipwith human beings without compromising his justice? The short answeris: through Abraham and his offspring (Gen. 12:1–3), whoeventually multiplied into the nation of Israel. After God redeemedthem from their slavery in Egypt (Exod. 1–15), he brought themto Sinai to make a covenant with them that was predicated onobedience (19:5–6). A central component of this covenant wasthe sacrificial system (e.g., Lev. 1–7), which God provided asa means of dealing with sin. In addition to the regular sacrificesmade for sin throughout the year, God set apart one day a year toatone for Israel’s sins (Lev. 16). On this Day of Atonement thehigh priest took the blood of a goat into the holy of holies andsprinkled it on the mercy seat as a sin offering. Afterward he took asecond goat and confessed “all the iniquities of the people ofIsrael, and all their transgressions, all their sins, putting them onthe head of the goat, and sending it away into the wilderness....The goat shall bear on itself all their iniquities to a barrenregion; and the goat shall be set free in the wilderness” (Lev.16:21–22 NRSV). In order for the holy God to dwell with sinfulpeople, extensive provisions had to be made to enable fellowship.
Despitethese provisions, Israel repeatedly and persistently broke itscovenant with God. Even at the highest points of prosperity under thereign of David and his son Solomon, sin plagued God’s people,including the kings themselves. David committed adultery and murder(2Sam. 11:1–27). Solomon had hundreds of foreign wivesand concubines, who turned his heart away from Yahweh to other gods(1Kings 11:1–8). Once the nation split into two (Israeland Judah), sin and its consequences accelerated. Idolatry becamerampant. The result was exile from the land (Israel in 722 BC, Judahin 586 BC). But God refused to give up on his people. He promised toraise up a servant who would suffer for the sins of his people as aguilt offering (Isa. 52:13–53:12).
AfterGod’s people returned from exile, hopes remained high that thegreat prophetic promises, including the final remission of sins, wereat hand. But disillusionment quickly set in as the returnees remainedunder foreign oppression, the rebuilt temple was but a shell ofSolomon’s, and a Davidic king was nowhere to be found. Beforelong, God’s people were back to their old ways, turning awayfrom him. Even the priests, who were charged with the administrationof the sacrificial system dealing with the sin of the people, failedto properly carry out their duties (Mal. 1:6–2:9).
NewTestament.During the next four hundred years of prophetic silence, the longingfor God to finally put away the sins of his people grew. At last,when the conception and birth of Jesus were announced, it wasrevealed that he would “save his people from their sins”(Matt. 1:21). In the days before the public ministry of Jesus, Johnthe Baptist prepared the way for him by “preaching a baptism ofrepentance for the forgiveness of sins” (Luke 3:3). Whereasboth Adam and Israel were disobedient sons of God, Jesus proved to bethe obedient Son by his faithfulness to God in the face of temptation(Matt. 2:13–15; 4:1–11; 26:36–46; Luke 3:23–4:13;Rom. 5:12–21; Phil. 2:8; Heb. 5:8–10). He was also theSuffering Servant who gave his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45;cf. Isa. 52:13–53:12). On the cross Jesus experienced the wrathof God that God’s people rightly deserved for their sin. Withhis justice fully satisfied, God was free to forgive and justify allwho are identified with Christ by faith (Rom. 3:21–26). Whatneither the law nor the blood of bulls and goats could do, JesusChrist did with his own blood (Rom. 8:3–4; Heb. 9:1–10:18).
Afterhis resurrection and ascension, Jesus’ followers beganproclaiming the “good news” (gospel) of what Jesus didand calling to people, “Repent and be baptized, every one ofyou, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins”(Acts 2:38). As people began to experience God’s forgiveness,they were so transformed that they forgave those who sinned againstthem (Matt. 6:12; 18:15–20; Col. 3:13). Although believerscontinue to struggle with sin in this life (Rom. 8:12–13; Gal.5:16–25), sin is no longer master over them (Rom. 6:1–23).The Holy Spirit empowers them to fight sin as they long for the newheaven and earth, where there will be no sin, no death, and no curse(Rom. 8:12–30; Rev. 21–22).
Aseven this very brief survey of the biblical story line from Genesisto Revelation shows, sin is a fundamental aspect of the Bible’splot. Sin generates the conflict that drives the biblical narrative;it is the fundamental “problem” that must be solved inorder for God’s purposes in creation to be completed.
Definitionand Terminology
Definitionof sin. Althoughno definition can capture completely the breadth and depth of theconcept of sin, it seems best to regard sin as a failure to conformto God’s law in thought, feeling, attitude, word, action,orientation, or nature. In this definition it must be remembered thatGod’s law is an expression of his perfect and holy character,so sin is not merely the violation of an impersonal law but rather isa personal offense against the Creator. Sin cannot be limited toactions. Desires (Exod. 20:17; Matt. 5:27–30), emotions (Gen.4:6–7; Matt. 5:21–26), and even our fallen nature ashuman beings (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:1–3) can be sinful as well.
Terminology.TheBible uses dozens of terms to speak of sin. Neatly classifying themis not easy, as there is significant overlap in the meaning and useof the various terms. Nonetheless, many of the terms fit in one ofthe following four categories.
1.Personal. Sin is an act of rebellion against God as the creator andruler of the universe. Rather than recognizing God’sself-revelation in nature and expressing gratitude, humankindfoolishly worships the creation rather than the Creator (Rom.1:19–23). The abundant love, grace, and mercy that God shows tohumans make their rebellion all the more stunning (Isa. 1:2–31).Another way of expressing the personal nature of sin is ungodlinessor impiety, which refers to lack of devotion to God (Ps. 35:16; Isa.9:17; 1Pet. 4:18).
2.Legal. A variety of words portray sin in terms drawn from thelawcourts. Words such as “transgression” and “trespass”picture sin as the violation of a specific command of God or thecrossing of a boundary that God has established (Num. 14:41–42;Rom. 4:7, 15). When individuals do things that are contrary to God’slaw, they are deemed unrighteous or unjust (Isa. 10:1; Matt. 5:45;Rom. 3:5). Breaking the covenant with God is described as violatinghis statutes and disobeying his laws (Isa. 24:5). The result isguilt, an objective legal status that is present whenever God’slaw is violated regardless of whether the individual subjectivelyfeels guilt.
3.Moral. In the most basic sense, sin is evil, the opposite of what isgood. Therefore, God’s people are to hate evil and love what isgood (Amos 5:14–15; Rom. 12:9). Similarly, Scripture contraststhe upright and the wicked (Prov. 11:11; 12:6; 14:11). One could alsoinclude here the term “iniquity,” which is used to speakof perversity or crookedness (Pss. 51:2; 78:38; Isa. 59:2). Frequentmention is also made of sexual immorality as an especially grievousdeparture from God’s ways (Num. 25:1; Rom. 1:26–27;1Cor. 5:1–11).
4.Cultic. In order for a person to approach a holy God, that individualhad to be in a state of purity before him. While a person couldbecome impure without necessarily sinning (e.g., a menstruating womanwas impure but not sinful), in some cases the term “impurity”clearly refers to a sinful state (Lev. 20:21; Isa. 1:25; Ezek.24:13). The same is true of the term “unclean.” Althoughit is frequently used in Leviticus to speak of ritual purity, inother places it clearly refers to sinful actions or states (Ps. 51:7;Prov. 20:9; Isa. 6:5; 64:6).
Metaphors
Inaddition to specific terms used for “sin,” the Bible usesseveral metaphors or images to describe it. The following four areamong the more prominent.
Missingthe mark.In both Hebrew and Greek, two of the most common words for “sin”have the sense of missing the mark. But this does not mean that sinis reduced to a mistake or an oversight. The point is not that aperson simply misses the mark of what God requires; instead, it isthat he or she is aiming for the wrong target altogether (Exod. 34:9;Deut. 9:18). Regardless of whether missing the mark is intentional ornot, the individual is still responsible (Lev. 4:2–31; Num.15:30).
Departingfrom the way.Sin as departing from God’s way is especially prominent in thewisdom literature. Contrasts are drawn between the way of therighteous and the way of the wicked (Ps. 1:1, 6; Prov. 4:11–19).Wisdom is pictured as a woman who summons people to walk in her ways,but fools ignore her and depart from her ways (Prov. 9:1–18).Those who do not walk in God’s ways are eventually destroyed bytheir own wickedness (Prov. 11:5; 12:26; 13:15).
Adultery.Since God’s relationship with his people is described as amarriage (Isa. 62:4–5; Ezek. 16:8–14; Eph. 5:25–32),it is not surprising that the Bible describes their unfaithfulness asadultery. The prophet Hosea’s marriage to an adulterous womanvividly portrays Israel’s unfaithfulness to Yahweh (Hos. 1–3).When the Israelites chase after other gods, Yahweh accuses them ofspiritual adultery in extremely graphic terms (Ezek. 16:15–52).When Christians join themselves to a prostitute or participate inidolatry, they too are engaged in spiritual adultery (1Cor.6:12–20; 10:1–22).
Slavery.Sin is portrayed as a power that enslaves. The prophets make it clearthat Israel’s bondage to foreign powers is in fact a picture ofits far greater enslavement to sin (Isa. 42:8; 43:4–7;49:1–12). Paul makes a similar point when he refers to thosewho do not know Christ as slaves to sin, unable to do anything thatpleases God (Rom. 6:1–23; 8:5–8). Sin is a cosmic powerthat is capable of using even the law to entrap people in its snare(Rom. 7:7–25).
Scopeand Consequences
Sindoes not travel alone; it brings a large collection of baggage alongwith it. Here we briefly examine its scope and consequences.
Scope.The stain of sin extends to every part of the created order. As aresult of Adam’s sin, the ground was cursed to resist humanefforts to cultivate it, producing thorns and thistles (Gen.3:17–18). The promised land is described as groaning under theweight of Israel’s sin and in need of Sabbath rest (2Chron.36:21; Jer. 12:4); Paul applies the same language to all creation aswell (Rom. 8:19–22).
Sinaffects every aspect of the individual: mind, heart, will, emotions,motives, actions, and nature (Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Jer. 17:9; Rom.3:9–18). Sometimes this reality is referred to as “totaldepravity.” This phrase means not that people are as sinful asthey could be but rather that every aspect of their lives is taintedby sin. As a descendant of Adam, every person enters the world as asinner who then sins (Rom. 5:12–21). Sin also pollutes societalstructures, corrupting culture, governments, nations, and economicmarkets, to name but a few.
Consequences.Since the two greatest commandments are to love God and to love one’sneighbor as oneself (Matt. 22:34–40), it makes sense that sinhas consequences on both the vertical and the horizontal level.Vertically, sin results in both physical and spiritual death (Gen.2:16–17; Rom. 5:12–14). It renders humanity guilty inGod’s court of law, turns us into God’s enemies, andsubjects us to God’s righteous wrath (Rom. 1:18; 3:19–20;5:6–11). On the horizontal level, sin causes conflict betweenindividuals and harms relationships of every kind. It breedsmistrust, jealousy, and selfishness that infect even the closestrelationships.
Conclusion
Nosubject is more unpleasant than sin. But a proper understanding ofsin is essential for understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ. As thePuritan Thomas Watson put it, “Until sin be bitter, Christ willnot be sweet.”
Justification is an important topic because of itsrelationship to Christian salvation and sanctification. The word“justification” occurs only five times in the Bible(NIV), but related words comprise significant themes in bothTestaments. Part of the difficulty in the exposition of“justification” is English terminology. English has twoword groups that express the same conceptual range for single wordgroups in Hebrew and Greek. So in addition to words related tojustification, such as “justly,” “just,” andthe very important verb “to justify,” no discussion canavoid the terms “righteous” and “righteousness.”Care must also be exercised in allowing the biblical texts todetermine word meaning, since both “justice” and“righteousness” terminology can have contemporaryconnotations foreign to the biblical texts.
Justificationis often related to a legal setting in both Jewish and Greco-Romancontexts, with its judge, defendant, evidence, criteria forevaluating the evidence, verdicts, and the implications of verdicts.This is a good word picture for justification and is used in theBible itself. As long as the legal picture is extended to everydayaffairs, moral and ethical concerns, and different criteria forevidence evaluation, it is a fine starting point for understandingthe doctrine of justification.
Commonand Extraordinary Justification
Thesalvific importance of justification has greatly shaped theexposition that follows. Justification has been somewhat awkwardlydivided into common and extraordinary justification, with the latterbearing a significant relationship to the doctrine of salvation. Theformer is discussed only briefly in OT and NT paragraphs. In commonjustification, a person’s works or deeds are judged accordingto a standard of righteousness. Righteous deeds are judged and giventhe verdict “righteous.” Unrighteous deeds are judged andgiven the verdict “unrighteous.” Extraordinaryjustification occurs when an unrighteous person or deed is judged andgiven the verdict “righteous” by some supernaturalintervention.
Commonjustification in the OT may be described in various contexts: (1)incomparative or relative righteousness between humans (e.g., Gen.38:26; Ezek. 16:51–52); (2)in specific or concretesituations with God as judge (e.g., 2Chron. 6:23: “Judgebetween your servants, condemning the guilty and bringing down ontheir heads what they have done, and vindicating the innocent bytreating them in accordance with their innocence”; (3)inspecific or concrete situations with a human as judge (e.g., Deut.25:1: “When people have a dispute, they are to take it to courtand the judges will decide the case, acquitting the innocent andcondemning the guilty”); (4)in giving justice (e.g.,2Sam. 15:4; cf. Ps. 82:3); (5)in proving correct or right(e.g., Ps. 51:4; Isa. 43:9).
Extraordinaryjustification is much rarer in the OT. A possible example is Dan.8:14, where in a vision the sanctuary is desecrated and after a time“will be reconsecrated” or, in other terms, “willbe justified holy.” It seems quite unusual that the unholy “isjustified” as holy. In Isa. 45:25 we find the promise that “inthe Lord all the offspring of Israel shall be justified” (ESV).Another verse declares that Yahweh’s “righteous servantwill justify many, and he will bear their iniquities” (Isa.53:11). The need for extraordinary justification and the deficiencyof ordinary justification is clear in Ps. 143:1–2: “Lord,hear my prayer, listen to my cry for mercy; in your faithfulness andrighteousness come to my relief. Do not bring your servant intojudgment, for no one living is righteous before you” (cf. Job4:17; 25:4). The last phrase might be translated “no personwill be justified before you” and is cited by the apostle Paulin Gal. 2:16 (cf. Rom. 3:20).
Inthe NT, there are fewer references to common justification than inthe OT and a much greater development of extraordinary justification,predominantly in the Pauline letters (for similar concepts indifferent terms, see, e.g., “kingdom of God” in theSynoptic Gospels or “eternal life” in the Gospel ofJohn). Common justification in the NT may be described in variouscontexts: (1)in a specific situation with a human or God asjudge and a person’s behavior as the object of judgment (e.g.,Luke 16:15; 1Cor. 4:3–4; perhaps Luke 10:29; 18:9–14);(2)when “wisdom is proved right,” meaningvindicated by the results (Matt. 11:19; Luke 7:35); (3)in therelease from demands no longer binding (Rom. 6:7; cf. 1Cor.6:1); (4)in being proved morally right in fullness (1Tim.3:16; cf. Rom. 3:4).
Pauland Justification
Extraordinaryjustification in the NT is characteristic of the apostle Paul. Luke’sreport of Paul’s synagogue sermon in Pisidian Antioch concludeswith a brief overview of extraordinary justification (Acts 13:38–39).Paul proclaims that forgiveness of sins is available through Jesus.Every person trusting in Jesus is being justified “from allthings from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses”(NKJV). The forgiveness of sins leads to the verdict “innocent”even though sinners apart from Christ are guilty before God of theirunrighteous deeds.
InGal. 2:16 the verb “justify” is used three times: (1)“aperson is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in JesusChrist”; (2)“we, too, have put our faith in ChristJesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by theworks of the law”; (3)“by the works of the law noone will be justified.” The statements may be paraphrased inthe active voice (expressing the implied subject) as in thefollowing: (1)God is justifying a person not by works of Mosaiclaw, but by trust in Jesus Christ; (2)God justified us by trustin Christ, not by works of Mosaic law; (3)God will justify noperson by works of Mosaic law. In Gal. 2:16, God is the subject, theagent who justifies (cf. 3:8; Rom. 3:26, 30; 4:5; 8:30, 33). Thebasis of justification is faith in Christ, not works of the Mosaiclaw. The meaning of the verb “justify” may be discernedfrom the context. This justification is related to the gospel (e.g.,Gal. 2:14) and to receiving the Spirit (Gal. 3:2, 14), and theverdict of “righteous” for the person trusting in Jesus(Gal. 2:21; cf. 3:6, 11; 5:5; 1Cor. 1:30; 2Cor. 5:21).
Justificationand righteousness are important themes in Paul’s letter to theRomans. At the beginning of the letter, Paul declares that he is notashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God that bringssalvation to all who believe. In the gospel the righteousness of Godis revealed, a righteousness that is by faith (Rom. 1:16–17).Paul argues in Rom. 1:18–3:20, a section abounding withrighteousness language, that all humanity, Gentile and Jew, is underthe power of sin (3:10), that no one is righteous (e.g., 3:10–18).All are subject to condemnation (i.e., the declaration of “guilty”and “unrighteous” [cf. 5:16]) rather than justification(i.e., the declaration of “innocent” and “righteous”).No human will be justified before God by works of the law; the lawprovides knowledge of sin (3:20).
Thestate resulting from this unrighteousness and sin is God’swrath (e.g., Rom. 1:18). It is into this situation, this sad state ofaffairs where all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God,that the righteousness of God, God’s saving activity longanticipated in the OT, is revealed in the person and work of JesusChrist (3:21; 10:3). This righteousness is from God (3:22), arighteousness not related to human fulfillment of Mosaic law orrighteousness of one’s own (Rom. 3:21; 9:31–32; 10:4;Phil. 3:6, 9; cf. Eph. 2:8–9). This righteousness comes fromGod by trust in Christ (Rom. 3:22; 5:1; 9:30; 10:10; Phil. 3:9). Bytrust in Christ, God justifies each human in his freely given grace,whereby the human is redeemed from unrighteousness and sin (Rom.3:24).
Thedeath of Jesus is the sacrifice of atonement by which forgiveness ofsins is accomplished and made effectual in the human when one trustsin Jesus’ sacrifice (Rom. 3:25). This sacrifice demonstratesGod’s righteousness (3:26) because he justly judges human sinin Jesus. The one who had no sin of his own became sin for us (2Cor.5:21; cf. Rom. 5:6, 8; 1Cor. 15:3). In merciful forbearance,God passes over sins previously committed, delaying the execution ofhis justice, that he might justify the ungodly person who trusts inJesus’ person and work (Rom. 3:26; cf. 4:5). This justificationis of a different nature than ordinary righteousness on the humanlevel or of the kind that can be obtained by observing the Mosaiclaw. In this extraordinary justification, God reckons a humaninnocent of sin and righteous by trust and apart from works of Mosaiclaw (3:28). Both Jew and Gentile are reckoned righteous under thesame condition: trust in Jesus (3:29–30).
Althoughthe revelation of the person and work of Jesus the Messiah wasrelatively new at the time Paul wrote his letter to the Romans, Paulemphasizes in Rom. 4 that this idea of justification by trust and notby works goes back to the forefather of the Jews, Abraham. QuotingGen. 15:6, Paul demonstrates from Scripture that trust, not works,was the basis of extraordinary justification: Abraham believes God,and it is credited to him as righteousness. God justifies Abraham(i.e., God credits righteousness to Abraham) on the basis ofAbraham’s trust in God. Paul also cites most of Ps. 32:1–2,from a Davidic psalm, to further demonstrate the consistency ofjustification by faith with previous revelation. In this quotationthe crediting of righteousness apart from works is related to theforgiveness of transgression, where the verdict of the guilty becomes“innocent.” “He was delivered over to death for oursins and was raised to life for our justification” (Rom. 4:25).Extraordinary justification of unrighteous sinners leads to thetwofold verdict: innocent and righteous.
Titus3:3–6 expresses the same doctrine of extraordinaryjustification. Humanity is under sin when Jesus appears. God saves inhis mercy through Jesus, not on the basis of righteous human works.This saving activity is equivalent to being justified by Jesus’grace (3:7).
Jamesand Justification
Thereare three references to justification in James 2:14–26, whichappear at first glance to contradict extraordinary justification aspresented by Paul. In support of the claim that faith without deedsis useless (James 2:20), two questions are asked: Was not Abrahamconsidered righteous for what he did, and was not Rahab theprostitute considered righteous for what she did (i.e., justified byworks) (2:21, 25)? James 2:24 rephrases this as a proposition: aperson is justified by what he or she does, not by faith alone. Thecontext of 2:14–26 demonstrates that although the terms“faith,” “works,” and “justification”are the same as Paul’s, they have different meanings for James.Faith appears in this passage as mere knowledge (2:19), without anyimplications for living (2:14–18). For Paul, faith is a radicalcommitment of trust that submits one’s entire life under thelordship of Christ, something much different from the mere beliefportrayed as faith by James. Deeds or works in the James passage arethe concrete manifestations of what one believes (2:18). Works in thePauline justification passages are set in opposition to trust in theperson and work of the Lord Jesus. Outside of the justificationcontext, Paul is an advocate of works properly related to faith,righteousness, and holiness (e.g., Eph. 2:10; 1Thess. 1:3; cf.Rom. 1:5; 6:1–23; 8:4; 12:1–2). Justification is alsodifferent. Pauline justification most commonly relates to theextraordinary justification of declaring unrighteous sinners“innocent” and “righteous” based on trust inChrist. Justification in James has greater ties to commonjustification, focusing on the righteousness of a specific act at aspecific time.
OtherViews on Justification
Shortlyafter the age of the apostles, the doctrine of justification wasdeemphasized in many circles of church life in favor of a moremoralistic system. One group has repeatedly argued for centuries thatjustification infuses righteousness into the believer, and then thebeliever must do good works to complete justification. Thisconception fails to differentiate between sanctification andjustification and also misrepresents justification. In justificationGod declares the believer innocent and righteous, forgiving sin bymeans of Christ’s sacrifice and imputing Christ’srighteousness to the believer. This is not “legal fiction,”since justification has past, present, and future aspects (Rom. 3:30;8:30–34; Gal. 2:16; 5:5). Believers have been, are being, andwill be justified by faith in Christ Jesus. Recently, some haveclaimed that justification is related exclusively to the inclusion ofGentiles into the people of God without “works of the law,”racial and national identity markers (e.g., circumcision or foodlaws). Among the weaknesses of this view, the key one is that bothJew and Gentile are in need of extraordinary justification (Rom. 3:9,19–20, 23–26, 30; 9:30–10:13; Gal. 2:15–3:14).
The Letter of James has been hailed as possibly the earliest,most Jewish, and most practical of all NT letters. James 3:13 aptlycommunicates the book’s theme: “Who is wise andunderstanding among you? Let them show it by their good life, bydeeds done in humility that comes from wisdom.” The terms“wise” and “wisdom” occur five times in thebook (1:5; 3:13 [2×], 15, 17). Hence, the author instructed hisreaders on leading a life of faith that was characterized by a wisdomexpressed through speech and actions (2:12).
LiteraryFeatures
Theauthor’s employment of picturesque, concrete language has closeaffinities to OT wisdom literature and reflects Jesus’ teachingin the Sermon on the Mount.
James1:2 – Matthew 5:10-12
James1:4 – Matthew 5:48
James1:5; 5:15 – Matthew 7:7-12
James1:9 – Matthew 5:3
James1:20 – Matthew 5:22
James1:22 – Matthew 7:21
James2:5 – Matthew 5:3
James2:13 – Matthew 5:7; 6:14-15
James2:14-16 – Matthew 7:21-23
James3:12 – Matthew 7:16
James3:17-18 – Matthew 5:9
James4:4 – Matthew 6:24
James4:10 – Matthew 5:3-4
James4:11 – Matthew 7:1-2
James5:2 – Matthew 6:19
James5:10 – Matthew 5:12
James5:12 – Matthew 5:33-37
Likethe OT wisdom literature, the teaching in James has a stronglypractical orientation. Although the book contains some lengthierparagraphs, much of it consists of sequential admonishments andethical maxims that in some cases are only loosely related to oneanother. The sentences generally are short and direct. There arefifty-four verbs in the imperative. Connection between sentences issometimes created through repeated words. Yet the overall topic ofpractical faith and wisdom links these exhortations together.
Backgroundand Occasion
Afterthe death of Stephen, many disciples were scattered into the regionsof Judea and Samaria (Acts 7:54–8:3). In Acts 11:19 thenarrator notes, “Now those who had been scattered by thepersecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far asPhoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word only among Jews.”James may have written this letter to instruct and comfort thosescattered believers, as he addressed his letter to “the twelvetribes dispersed abroad” (1:1 NET). These Jewish Christians nolonger had direct contact with the apostles in Jerusalem and neededto be instructed and admonished in their tribulations. Apparently,the rich were taking advantage of them (2:6; 5:1–6), and theirtrials had led to worldliness, rash words, and strained relationships(2:1; 4:1, 11; 5:9). In view of persecution, some may have beentempted to hide their faith (5:10–11). James exhorted them todemonstrate a lifestyle that would reflect their faith.
James’sView on Works and Salvation
Somereaders of this letter have observed a seeming contradiction betweenJames’s call for good works and Paul’s insistence onsalvation by grace through faith apart from works (cf. James 2:14–26with Eph. 2:8–10). The discussion is complicated by James’sargument that a faith without works cannot “save” and byhis observation that Abraham was justified by what he did, not byfaith alone (James 2:14, 20–24). Paul, by contrast, maintainsthat Abraham was justified exclusively by faith (Rom. 4:1–3).
Referringrhetorically to people who claim to have faith but have no deeds,James asks, “Can such faith save them?” (2:14). That is,can the kind of faith that results in no works be genuine? Theexpected answer is no. The kind of faith that produces no workscannot be genuine faith; rather, it is “dead” (2:17, 26)and “useless” (2:20). This kind of faith is “byitself,” meaning that it produces no lasting fruit (2:17).James’s point is that genuine faith will produce good works inthe believer’s life. By way of contrast, a mere profession isnot necessarily an indication of genuine faith. Even demons believein God, but they are not saved; the kind of belief that they exhibitis merely an acknowledgment of God’s existence (2:19).
Accordingto James, Abraham was justified not in the sense of first beingdeclared righteous, but rather in the sense that his faith wasdemonstrated as genuine when he offered up Isaac (2:21). Paul, on theother hand, argues that salvation is obtained not through works butrather by faith alone. He quotes Gen. 15:6 to show that Abrahamtrusted God and was declared righteous several years before heoffered up Isaac (Rom. 4:3).
Accordingto Paul, Abraham was justified (declared righteous) before God whenhe believed God’s promise (Gen. 15:6), but for James, he wasjustified in the sense of giving observable proof of salvationthrough his obedience to God. Whereas Paul refers to the point andmeans of positional salvation, James refers to a subsequent eventthat confirmed that Abraham was justified.
I.Faith
A.Paul (Romans 4:1-3):
1.Is personal trust in God
2.Justifies one before God
3.Is not proof of Salvation
B.James (2:14-26)
1.Is a mere claim if there is no resulting fruit
II.Works
A.Paul (Romans 4:1-3):
1.Precede salvation
2.Attempt to merit salvation
3.Cannot justify before God
B.James (2:14-26)
1.Follow conversion
2.Are evidence of salvation
3.Confirm one’s salvation
Itis important to keep in mind that each author wrote with a differentpurpose. Paul wrote against Judaizers, who taught that a man had tobe circumcised and keep the OT law to be saved. James was warningagainst a mere profession of faith that leads to self-deception(1:22). John Calvin correctly expressed the biblical teaching thatfaith alone saves, but that kind of faith does not remain alone; itproduces good works (cf. Rom. 3:21–6:14; Eph. 2:8–10;Titus 2:11–14; 3:4–7).
Authorship
Theauthor identifies himself as “James, a servant of God and ofthe Lord Jesus Christ” (1:1). The NT mentions five personshaving the name “James”: (1)James the son ofZebedee and the brother of John (Matt. 4:21); (2)James the sonof Alphaeus (Matt. 10:3); (3)James “the younger”(Mark 15:40); (4)James the father of the apostle Judas (notJudas Iscariot; Luke 6:16); and (5)James the brother of Jesus(Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; Gal. 1:19).
Jamesthe brother of John was executed by Herod AgrippaI, who died inAD 44 (Acts 12:2). Since the Letter of James probably was writtenafter this date, the brother of John could not have written it.Neither James the son of Alphaeus, James the younger, nor James thefather of Judas was as prominent in the early church as the writer ofthis letter, who simply identified himself and assumed that hisreaders would know him (1:1). James the son of Alphaeus is mentionedfor the last time in Acts 1:13, and nothing is known of James thefather of Judas apart from the listing of his name in Luke 6:15; Acts1:13. (It is uncertain whether James the younger should be identifiedwith one of the other four or is a separate figure.) Thus, it isunlikely that any of them wrote the book. James the brother of Jesusis most likely the author of this letter.
Jamesthe Brother of the Lord
Atthe beginning of Jesus’ ministry, James, as well as hisbrothers Joses (Joseph), Judas, and Simon, did not believe that Jesuswas the Messiah (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3; John 7:5). However, they cameto believe in him after the resurrection (Acts 1:14; 1Cor.15:7). Paul called James, along with Peter and John, the “pillars”of the church (Gal. 2:9). James does not claim to be an apostle inthis letter; however, he is identified as one in Gal. 1:19. But therethe term “apostle” probably refers to a group of leadingdisciples outside the Twelve (cf. Acts 14:4, 14; 1Cor. 15:7;Gal. 2:9). Since the author of this letter employed many imperatives,his readers clearly accepted his authority. James, the brother ofJesus, who also became a key leader of the church in Jerusalem,possessed such authority (Acts 12:17; 15:13, 19; 21:18; Gal. 1:18–19;2:9).
Date
Somescholars hold that the Letter of James was written around AD 62,while others argue that James wrote this letter sometime in AD 45–50.Those who favor the earlier dates point out that the Jewish characterof this letter fits with this period when the church was mainlyJewish, based on the following criteria: (1)There is no mentionof Gentile Christians in the letter. (2)The author does notrefer to the teachings of the Judaizers. If the letter had beenwritten at a later date, we would expect the author to address theissue of circumcision among Christians. (3)The mention of“teachers” (3:1) and “elders” (5:14) as theleaders in the church reflects the structure of the primitive church.(4)The word “meeting” in 2:2 is the same Greek wordas for “synagogue.” It describes the gathering place ofthe early church. This implies a time when the congregation was stillprimarily Jewish (Acts 1–7).
Outline
I.Introduction (1:1)
II.The Wise Christian Is Patient in Trials (1:2–18)
A.How the Christian should face trials (1:2–12)
B.The source of temptations (1:13–18)
III.The Wise Christian Is a Practical Doer of the Word (1:19–2:26)
A.Hearers and doers of the word (1:19–25)
B.True religion (1:26–27)
C.Prejudice in the church (2:1–13)
D.Faith that works (2:14–26)
IV.The Wise Christian Masters the Tongue (3:1–18)
A.The power of the tongue (3:1–12)
B.The wisdom from above (3:13–18)
V.The Wise Christian Seeks Peace in Relationships (4:1–17)
A.The cause of quarrels (4:1–3)
B.Warning against worldliness (4:4–10)
C.Warning against slander (4:11–12)
D.Warning against boasting and self-sufficiency (4:13–17)
VI.The Wise Christian Is Patient and Prays When Facing Difficulties(5:1–20)
A.Warning to the rich (5:1–6)
B.Exhortation to patience (5:7–12)
C.The power of prayer (5:13–18)
D.The benefit of correcting those in error (5:19–20)
The word “Gentiles” is often used to translatewords meaning “nations” or “peoples.” It hasa Latin etymology from gens, meaning “clan” or “family”and, eventually, “race” or “people.” TheGreek word genos (“race, kind”) has a close relationship.In the Bible it loosely refers to nations or peoples other thanIsrael. English Bibles often translate it as “nations,”“peoples,” or “races.”
OldTestament
Ingeneral, within the OT, Gentiles are not God’s people. Godchose Israel to be his people, not other nations (Deut. 7:6–8;10:15; 26:18–19). Israelite ancestry determines membership inthe covenant people. Some writings thus forbid Gentiles from becomingpart of God’s people (Ezra 9–10; Neh. 13).
TheOT more commonly envisions Gentiles experiencing covenant blessingthrough Israel if they functionally become Israelites by keeping thelaw, including the parts we understand as ceremonial-ritual law. Thelaw is that special life-giving and regulating aspect of the covenantthat God revealed to Israel, which defines Israel (Lev. 18:1–5;20:22–26; Deut. 4:1–8, 32–40; 6:24–25; 8:1–6;10:12–11:32; 30:11–20; Josh. 1:7–9; Neh. 9:29; Pss.119; 147:19–20; Ezek. 20:9–13, 21).
Suchlaw/Israel-centered conditions for Gentiles relate to a broader OTunderstanding: God will reach and restore the world through Israel,the locus of his saving activity. God will bless the nations in andthrough Abraham’s descendants, Israel (Gen. 12:1–3;17:4–6; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). This covenant specificallyinvolves keeping the law (e.g., circumcision [Gen. 17:9–14]).Some passages depict this happening through the nations being subjectto Israel (Gen. 49:8–12; Num. 24:9, 17–19; Isa. 11:10–16;14:2; 54:3). In other passages the nations will be blessed byIsrael’s God as they come to Israel, bring back exiled Israel,serve Israel, present Israel with their own wealth, and/or fearIsrael’s God (Isa. 45:23; 49:22–23; 51:4–5; 55:5;60:3–16; 61:5–6; 66:12–13, 18–21; Mic.7:12–17; Zech. 2:11; 8:22–23). Other passages furtherelucidate the law-defined nature of such Gentile participation in theGod of Israel’s salvation (Exod. 12:48; Isa. 56:1–8; Jer.12:14–17; Zech. 14:16–21). The portrait of the nations“flowing” up the mountain of God associates Gentileparticipation in God’s salvation explicitly with the law (Isa.2:2–5; Mic. 4:1–5).
TheServant Songs in Isa. 40–55 also reflect thislaw/Israel-centered nature of salvation for the Gentiles. Theservant, explicitly identified as Israel (41:8, 9; 42:18–19;44:1–2, 21; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3; 54:17; see also 65:9; 66:14),serves as God’s instrument for reaching the nations (42:1, 6;49:6; 52:15). The OT usually condemns Gentiles who remain separatefrom Israel to some form of judgment, especially Gentiles who haveharmed Israel.
SecondTemple Judaism and Early Christianity
SecondTemple Jewish sources exhibit diverse views about Gentiles, theirnature, their possible relation to God, and their fate at the end.Many reflect something resembling the OT views. Israel as God’speople defined by the law, variously understood and contested amongSecond Temple sources, generally continues to be the locus of God’sultimate blessing activities.
SituatingJesus and early Christianity within this matrix of Gentilesensitivities is illuminating. As the Jesus movement spread acrossthe Mediterranean, proclaiming the ultimate salvation of the God ofIsrael in and through Jesus the Messiah, questions about how Gentilesexperience this salvation of the Jewish God had paramount importance.
SomeChristians, in line with traditional readings of the OT, thought thatGentiles must keep the law, becoming Jews to experience the God ofIsrael’s salvation in Jesus (Acts 11:1–3; 15:1, 5; Paul’sopponents in Galatia). Gentiles, after all, were separated from Godand his salvation promises to Israel (Rom. 9:4–5; Eph. 2:11–13;1Pet. 2:10). They stood under God’s condemnation,especially because they were controlled by their passions and sin,lacking self-mastery and the ability to live rightly (Rom. 1:18–32;Eph. 4:17–19; 1Thess. 4:5; 1Pet. 1:14, 18).
However,various NT authors, such as Paul, contend that Gentiles need not keepthe law, functionally becoming Jews, in order to participate in God’sultimate salvation in Jesus. Christ, the climax of Israel itself, hasreplaced the law’s centrality and ultimacy with himself and hisdeath and resurrection (Rom. 10:4). Through being united to Christ bythe Spirit, Gentiles are, apart from the law, grafted into true,redefined Israel and become Abraham’s descendants, inheritingGod’s promised salvation for Israel (Rom. 3:21–4:25;8:1–17; 9:30–10:17; 11:13–32; Gal. 2:11–4:7;Eph. 2:11–22; 3:4–6). In Christ, by the Spirit, Gentilesattain self-mastery over their passions and sin and thus live rightlybefore God, inheriting the kingdom of God in Christ (Rom. 6:1–8:30;1Cor. 6:9–11; Gal. 5:16–26; 1Thess. 4:3–8).Various NT writings thus reconfigure the situation of Gentiles withrespect to Israel’s God because of what God did in Christ.
Debatesabout Gentiles, the law, salvation, and what Christ means for theseissues persisted after Paul. Early Christians lacked an unequivocalsaying from Jesus on the matter, and not all accepted Paul and someother NT writings.
A God-established observance, often given as a remembrancefor generations, a memorial, always a commandment or an edict to becarried out, noted because God’s people are a covenant people,a perpetual statement of how God wants his people to relate to him.
OldTestament
Inthe OT the use of the word “ordinance” to translatecertain Hebrew words varies among English translations. Since“ordinance” relates to the law, it is often mentionedwith commandments and statutes, without a clear distinction ofmeaning (Deut. 7:11).
Inthe OT of the NIV, the word “ordinance” is thetranslation of these Hebrew words: (1)khuqqah (“statute,decree”), at least twenty-three times in Exodus, Leviticus,Numbers, and Ezekiel; (2)khoq (“action, statute,decree”), twice in Exodus; and (3)mishpat (“judgment,justice”), at least five times in the historical books, Psalms,and Ezekiel.
TheHebrew term khuqqah is used in all but one instance with ’olamto note a “lasting ordinance” in the NIV. This termrefers to the Passover and the feast of Unleavened Bread (Exod.12–13). The oil for the perpetual lampstand is referred to as alasting ordinance (Exod. 27:21), as are also the directions for theDay of Atonement (Lev. 23:31) and the ceremonial cleanliness for theman working with the ashes of the red heifer (Num. 19:10). Other,more-specific laws are noted as lasting ordinances. These include,for example, the restriction from wine for the priests (Lev. 10:9),restriction of the Sabbath on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16:31), andthe grain offering (Ezek. 46:14).
TheHebrew term khoq is also used in conjunction with ’olam inExod. 12:24; 30:21, translated as “lasting ordinance” bythe NIV. It notes the Passover as a lasting ordinance and the ritualcleansing of the priests as a lasting ordinance.
TheHebrew term mishpat, often translated “judgment,” is alsotranslated in the NIV as “ordinance.” In these instancesit notes edicts such as that of the equal division of spoils (1Sam.30:25) and the edicts of David (2Chron. 8:14). The Levitesstate that Israel has sinned against God’s mishpatim (Neh.9:29), and the priests will judge according to God’s ordinances(Ezek. 44:24).
NewTestament
Inthe NT, the KJV (3x) and NASB (1x) translate dikaiōma(“regulation, requirement”) as “ordinance,”and both also once translate diatagē (“that which iscommanded”) as “ordinance”; additionally, the KJVtranslates paradosis(“tradition”) and ktisis (“human authority”)as “ordinance” once each. The ESV, NRSV, KJV, and NASBtranslate dogma (“ordinance, command”) in Eph. 2:15 as“ordinance.” These terms seem to refer to the edict ofGod for his people, his commandments that are to be obeyed. The NIVdoes not translate any noun as “ordinance” in the NT.
ChristianTheology
InChristian theology the use of the word “ordinance” is notdissimilar. It denotes a God-ordained observance given as a commandfor his people to fulfill as a covenant people.
Protestantsgenerally recognize two ordinances in the NT: baptism and the Lord’sSupper (Communion, Eucharist). The common characteristics identifyingthese relate to their ordination by Christ to picture his work in thelife of believers and the church and their participation in him. (Seealso Sacrament.)
Baptism.The concept of baptism is found in five different Greek words, thenouns baptisma (“plunging, dipping”), baptismos(“washing, cleansing, plunging”), and baptistēs(“baptizer”), and the verbs baptizō (“toplunge, dip, wash”) and baptō (“to dip”). Themeanings of these words have been discussedthroughout church history, but all of them seem to denote an actionof dipping or plunging.
Christianbaptism certainly is rooted in the baptisms of John, Jesus, and theapostles. In the book of Acts the disciples simply continue tobaptize those who repent, as they had done at the inception of Jesus’ministry (John 4:2). There is no surprise expressed by the recipientsof baptism; the expression seems a natural follow-up to theirrepentance. The connection to Judaism, however, is unclear. Judaismwas saturated with rituals of purification with water and washings.These washings were similar to baptisms. While Jewish washings wereperpetual, only the Jewish proselyte baptism was a onetime rite. Itis unclear when proselyte baptism started or how it developed. It mayalready have been in place in the time of Jesus. The Talmud laterspeaks of it, but it is not mentioned in the OT and seems to bemissing from Second Temple literature altogether. Just as there werecleansings in the OT rituals, so too the proselyte baptism was apreparatory cleansing of the proselyte candidate. Yet proselytebaptism before the time of Jesus has little extant evidence.Additionally, John would not seem to look to a ritual for Gentiles.
Othershave proposed that John was in continuity with a practice of Qumran.The two were very similar (though the Qumran rite was perpetual). AtQumran, baptismal cleansing and repentance looks to the Messiah(Qumran was an eschatological community). Yet it may be that this, aswell as the baptisms of John, Jesus, and the apostles, was derivedfrom (common?) sources not now known.
ForJohn, too, baptism is a sign of repentance and cleansing inpreparation. John is the forerunner of the Messiah, and as such hisfocus is also eschatological. John brings an immediate focus on theMessiah, and he draws the Israelite community together to recognize,receive, listen to, and follow the Messiah. With this as thesignificance of John’s baptism, it is surprising to find Jesuscoming to him for baptism. Although Jesus has no need for cleansingand preparation, he is baptized in solidarity with John’smessage and his people. When Jesus is baptized, it apparently marksthe inception of the kingdom as the Spirit comes upon him and theFather affirms him. Thereafter, Jesus notes the kingdom as being “athand” in his presence.
Jesusbaptizes at least some of the disciples (John 3:22), though thedisciples are noted as those who regularly do the baptizing (John4:2). No doubt this baptism referenced cleansing and preparation, asthe Messiah was present. Apparently, the baptism of Jesus’disciples subsided, since there is no further reference to it by thefour evangelists.
Onthe day of Pentecost, repentance and baptism with regard to theMessiah are begun by the apostles postresurrection. This is accordingto the command of Jesus before the ascension to make disciples by wayof baptism and instruction (Matt. 28:19–20). This baptismcommanded by Jesus is to be done “in the name” of thethree persons of the Trinity. The early baptismal creed was “Jesusis Lord,” and it may have included a threefold query of beliefin the Father, the Son, and the Spirit. Postresurrection baptismsymbolizes cleansing; the inundation in the water symbolizes thiscleansing as effected in the death and resurrection of Christ,“buried with him through baptism into death” (Rom. 6:4).
Baptismis always assumed of a believer (Acts 2:38; 22:16; Rom. 6:3–4;1Pet. 3:21). It would have never occurred to the early churchto dichotomize salvation and baptism as is often done today. Theexception can be seen in Paul’s writings, where he emphasizesthe kerygma over the act of baptism (1Cor. 1:17). For Paul, thewatershed is the preaching of the gospel to be received by faith, buthe perpetually appeals to the baptism of his readers.
Somehave overemphasized baptism by seeing it as the salvific entity. Acts10:47 applies for Cornelius and his family the permanent reception ofthe Spirit before baptism. This reception of the Spirit is laterlikened by Peter to the original gift of the Spirit at Pentecost(Acts 11:15). Although it would be unwise to infer doctrine from themere sequence of narrative events, the passage in Acts 10 at leastshows the nonnecessity of the sequence of baptism to come into unionwith Christ. This is enacted by the operation of the Spirit alone.
Inevery case in the NT, the candidates for baptism are those who havecome to repentance, and they are always adults. There is no directreference to infant baptism. Some in the church have assumed infantbaptism in family contexts, thought to be especially effectual indealing with original sin. But overall, the biblical testimony seemsto indicate that baptism is for believers who have repented. Becauseit is usually NT authority figures who administer baptism, a generalconsensus arose that only the bishop of the church should administerbaptism. Ignatius calls for the bishop only to minister bothordinances. The tradition that baptism be administered by an ordainedofficer of the church is largely maintained today, though there is noedict in the Scripture.
Withregard to mode, the Didache calls for immersion in running water asthe preferred method, with still water being the second choice. Ifwater is not available for immersion, then a threefold pouring isallowed. In church history, those who prioritize the symbol ofcleansing use sprinkling as the mode. In any event, when anythingwith regard to mode can be discerned from Scripture, it involvesdipping into water (“he went up out of the water” [Matt.3:16]; “they came up out of the water” [Acts 8:39]). (Seealso Baptism; Infant Baptism.)
TheLord’s Supper.The ordinance of the Lord’s Supper is also referred to as theLord’s Table, Communion, and the Eucharist. The Lord’sSupper is a memorial of the death of Christ. In the partaking of thebread and the cup there is remembrance of the ground of salvationeffected in the sacrifice of the cross. Most evangelical Christiansconsider the bread and the cup to symbolically represent the body andblood of Christ. Other Christian traditions claim that the bread andthe cup are transformed into the real body and blood of Christ(transubstantiation) or that the real body and blood of Christ arepresent alongside the bread and the cup (consubstantiation).
Thenarrative of Jesus’ Last Supper is found in Matt. 26:26–29;Mark 14:22–25; Luke 22:15–20; 1Cor. 11:23–26.This meal as recorded in the Gospels is the covenant meal celebratedin view of the ratification of the new covenant that would soon beaccomplished (“this cup is the new covenant in my blood”[Luke 22:20]). Jesus instituted the supper on the night before thecrucifixion. The Last Supper of Jesus with the apostles in the upperroom also looks tothe past redemption effected in the Passoveron that fateful night in Egypt. It looks to the present work ofChrist as the covenant meal. It anticipates the messianic meal in theeschaton. Just as the bread and the cup with Jesus in his Last Supperwere connected with the Passover meal, so in the early church it wasobserved with the love feast. The fellowship of the church containedthe love feast, with the bread given before or after the meal and thecup following the bread. But by the second century, the bread and thecup took on a more liturgical air, being separated from the lovefeast.
Muchof what we know about the Lord’s Supper comes throughdiscussion of problems in the Corinthian church. The very thing thatthe Lord’s Supper was to foster—unity around the cross ofJesus Christ—was denied. The exact abuse in Corinth is unknown,but it probably involved the rich oppressing the poor by exclusion ordenial of food. The response of the apostle is that if they cannoteat in equal moderation with all socioeconomic strata in the body,they are to eat at home (“Don’t you have homes to eat anddrink in?” [1Cor. 11:22]). (See also Last Supper; Lord’sSupper.)
A payment made to redeem a slave, release a captive, or freea criminal from punishment.
Inthe OT, slaves could be set free by ransom (Lev. 19:20), and certainkinds of criminals are excluded from ransom (Num. 35:31–32),implying that others could be ransomed to escape their punishment.Ransom is also used more broadly to include notions of atonement(Exod. 30:12) and as a near synonym for “redemption”(Jer. 31:11 NASB, NRSV, KJV). “Ransom” is frequently usedmetaphorically to describe God’s saving actions on behalf ofthe nation (Isa. 43:3; 50:2; Jer. 31:11; Hos. 13:14), saving themfrom their enemies, or of individuals (Job 5:20; Ps. 55:18), savingthem from death. In these cases, the emphasis is on the rescueeffected, not the price paid.
Inthe NT, “ransom” is used to describe the atoning work ofChrist. Jesus describes his own purpose: “The Son of Man didnot come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransomfor many” (Mark 10:45// Matt. 20:28). Paul uses the samelanguage: “Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for allpeople” (1Tim. 2:5–6). The author of Hebrewsdescribes the effect of this ransom: “He has died as a ransomto set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant”(Heb. 9:15). All three references indicate that the price paid forthe ransom is Jesus’ life, given up to death on the cross. Eachof the literal meanings of “ransom” has its metaphoricalequivalent: Christ’s death frees us from our slavery to sin anddeath (Rom. 6:6), releases us from our captivity to the law (7:4–6),and pays the price of the punishment that our sins deserved(3:25–26). The ransom was not paid to the devil, and it is bestunderstood as the satisfaction of God’s own justice (Rom.6:23).
God is the all-powerful, all-knowing, morally perfect creatorof the universe; and we are his creatures—no less, but also nomore. Thus, an unimaginable distance must exist between God and us;and this fact has led some theologians to despair of knowing anythingabout him for sure, not even that he actually has these attributes ofdeity. It might seem, furthermore, that some biblical texts encouragesuch a view. Psalm 92:5 recognizes the distance: “How great areyour works, O Lord, how profound your thoughts!” Psalm 145:3says that “no one can fathom” God’s greatness.According to Ps. 147:5, “Great is our Lord and mighty in power;his understanding has no limit.” In Ps. 139:6, David tries tocomprehend God’s perfect insight and concludes, “Suchknowledge is too wonderful for me, too lofty for me to attain.”The doxology of Rom. 11:33–36 exults in the uniqueness of God:“Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge ofGod! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracingout!” In Isa. 55:9, God says, “As the heavens are higherthan the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughtshigher than your thoughts.” Based on these passages and others,and knowing what the difference between creator and creature mustgenerally imply, one might suspect that we can know nothing ofsubstance about God.
Infact, however, the biblical writers tell a different story, beingcautiously optimistic about theology’s prospects. On the onehand, they note our creaturely limitations and God’stranscendence, as seen above. We cannot fully comprehend our Creator.We never will, not even through the eons of eternity. God will alwayshave something more to show us about himself, more that we can learnand adore. In that sense, the biblical writers are cautious aboutwhat theology can grasp. On the other hand, we must be able to learnsome things about God; otherwise, the Scriptures themselves would notexist, since they tell us about God and much else besides. Divineomnipotence, therefore, includes the ability to produce in usadequate theological understanding. We always lean on God, and no oneunderstands him at all apart from his initiative. He remainssovereign over this event, as with any other. But God has madehimself known in two general ways, according to Scripture.
Generaland Special Revelation
First,the biblical writers expect each of us to grasp something of God’snature, based on what is called “general revelation.”General revelation operates in a broadcasted way, so to speak,relying upon commonplace experience and the latter’s God-givenability to make us aware of his existence and nature. We all see theheavens that “declare the glory of God” (Ps. 19:1). Paulargues that every person can detect the “invisible qualities”of God, his “eternal power and divine nature,” in what hehas created, so that we have no excuse for decadent theology andbehavior (Rom. 1:20). The law of God is “written on [our]hearts” (Rom. 2:15), so that we grasp what we owe to him andeach other. Even though God has not spoken directly to every nation,“he has not left himself without testimony”; he has shownall people “kindness by giving [them] rain from heaven andcrops in their seasons” (Acts 14:17). We can learn some thingsabout God from these sources given to us, and thus we are accountablefor right conduct in relationship to them. However, generalrevelation lacks the detail and assurance of what is called “specialrevelation.”
Specialrevelation differs from general revelation in having a targetaudience. It conveys information about God, human beings, and ourworld that cannot be deduced from everyday, highly accessibleexperience. Jesus suffered for our sins. Our trust in his death onthe cross will save us. God is a Trinity of Father, Son, and HolySpirit, though there is one God. Christ will return in power andglory to judge all nations. We can think of God as our heavenlyFather, a morally perfect deity who cares about the individualperson. The Holy Spirit helps us in our weakness as we wonder how topray. God is always sovereign, even over the wicked deeds of humanbeings and the suffering that they cause. These are essential pointsof Christian doctrine. Yet we cannot substantiate any of them bycarefully observing ourselves, our world, or the facts of history.Indeed, sometimes our own thoughts lead us to resist these claimsbecause they entail great mysteries. One can easily (but wrongly)equate “I do not understand this” with “This isfalse.” Thus, our knowledge of these doctrines rests upon God’swillingness to speak and our readiness to hear what he says withhumility and trust, without having all our questions answered. Thevehicle for this latter kind of knowledge is called “specialrevelation.”
Allrevelation is “special,” simply because we can learnnothing about God apart from his self-disclosure. However,theologians use the technical term “special revelation”to capture the idea that God has revealed some matters of doctrineonly to specific people, with the expectation that they will preachthese truths to others as he requires them to do. These doctrinalmatters include the claims given above concerning some aspects ofGod’s nature, his attitude toward human beings, the plan ofsalvation, and so forth. Thus, the Bible is special revelation parexcellence; likewise, the preaching of prophets, Jesus, and then hischosen apostles (to list them in chronological order) is specialrevelation. Of course, since we do not have access to propheticteaching and the life and words of Christ apart from Scripture, thelatter is our sole source of special revelation. We cannot now seeand hear Jesus as his first-century observers did, but we encounterhim as the incarnate Word through the inerrant written word ofScripture. Theology, therefore, concerns what the Bible says aboutGod, humanity, Christ, and so forth, and it looks to generalrevelation, if at all, merely to corroborate or illustrate whatScripture substantiates. Likewise, the promises of God to bless thepreaching of his truth attach to special revelation rather than towhat one might glean from other sources (Isa. 55:11).
TheBible as Special Revelation
TheBible stands alone in revealing who God is and showing what pleaseshim. Its exact contents were ordained by God through inspiration.Scripture is “God-breathed” (2Tim. 3:16), havingbeen produced when people “spoke from God as they were carriedalong by the Holy Spirit” (2Pet. 1:21). Consequently,even though prophecy occurs in NT churches (1Cor. 14), it isnot received there as the unchallengeable teaching of OT prophets,Jesus, or his apostles. Rather, observers are to weigh carefully whatprophets say (1Cor. 14:29). John expressly warns of falseprophecy in the churches: “Dear friends, do not believe everyspirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God,because many false prophets have gone out into the world”(1John 4:1). These facts should lead one to be cautious inusing such phrases as “God told me that...”and in urging other Christians to act upon anyone’s privatesensations of being led by the Spirit, absent any objective reasonsfor doing so. Prophecy given by the Holy Spirit today should involvethe application of biblical truth to present challenges andopportunities. The same principle applies to subjective promptingsfrom the Holy Spirit. They should apply received doctrine withoutrevising it and must always be tested by the church.
Thesixty-six books of the Bible were written by real people, living inconcrete historical settings, and using ordinary language. Yet theyintend to speak of heavenly things and of a holy God. Consequently,theologians face the challenge of “seeing through” theBible’s figurative statements and artistic forms to the truthsthey convey, but without landing in unhelpful abstractions. Mostpeople who read the book of Exodus assume that God does not have anactual “arm” to outstretch (6:6) or a “face”that one may not see and live (33:23). But Moses chose these words toreveal something about God, and thus we have to ask how far theanalogy goes and to what degree it reaches down to our human level ofunderstanding. We know that God must somehow “talk down”to us, using our own language, even as he gives us historical andtheological claims having real content. Balancing these tworealities—the “otherness” of God and the earthinessof the written, human word that reveals him—is the delicatetask of exegesis.
Theinterpreter must also negotiate the various kinds or genres ofliterature found in the Bible, especially the ones that seem mostalien to our own ways of communicating. Our own documents do not(usually) feature the elaborate images of the book of Revelation orthe structures of Hebrew poetry found in the Psalter, and we do notlive in the first-century world. Therefore, to read the Scripturescorrectly, we must become culturally literate, so that we see ourtexts through ancient Near Eastern and Greco-Roman eyes. These fieldsare studied with care, based on the assumption that the Bible’sforms of literature were customary for their own time. They were notentirely strange to their original audiences. Thus, they can becomeless strange to us; and since the Bible is fully human as well asfully divine, reading its pages through the appropriate culturallenses will give us access to what the Spirit says to the churches.
HumanLimitations
Ananalysis of general and special revelation should consider theso-called noetic effects of sin—that is, the effects that sinhas upon our ability to reason and to learn. Human beings werecreated in the image of God (Gen. 1:26–27), having the capacityto interact with their Creator. They bear some “familyresemblance” to God, notwithstanding their materiality andfinitude. But when Adam and Eve sinned, they corrupted themselves andtheir descendants, so much so that Paul can describe them as beingenslaved to sin and death (Rom. 5–6). Since the fall, thebiblical writers have proclaimed the blindness of human beings to thethings of God. All people are “under the power of sin,”and “there is no one who understands” (Rom. 3:9–11).In Eph. 2:1–3 Paul describes unrepentant sinners as being “deadin [their] transgressions and sins,” so that they follow carnal“desires and thoughts.” Even someone as naturallyqualified as Nicodemus fails to see who Jesus is apart from thesovereign power of the Holy Spirit (John 3:1–15). Fallen humanbeings do not see what they ought to see and grasp what they ought tograsp. They can even say in their hearts, “There is no God”(Ps. 14:1).
Humanbeings do not have 20/20 intellectual vision, and our desires arecorrupted. Consequently, we do not benefit from God’sself-revelation as Adam did, not to mention the glorified Christianwho knows fully (1Cor. 13:12). In some cases, the sinner doesnot want to acknowledge the disclosures of God and thus does notperceive them. Habitual sin and doc-trin-al innovation can “sear”the conscience as with an iron, making “hypocritical liars”impervious to sound teaching (1Tim. 4:2). Although the heavensdeclare the glory of God, and although “in these last days hehas spoken to us by his Son” (Heb. 1:2), fallen human beingswill not grasp these truths. Yet they remain accountable to Godbecause the disabling wounds of sin are self-inflicted. Even thedemons of Scripture, who identify Jesus accurately, recoil from whatthey clearly perceive (Matt. 8:29; Mark 3:11; 5:7), as do thePharisees who attribute the Spirit’s work to Beelzebul (Matt.12:22–32). In these cases, the difficulty is not cognitive butaffective. Character becomes intellectual destiny.
Theworld abounds with religious viewpoints, each one claiming to revealhow it works and what constitutes the good life. It is also unlikelythat each of them contains only false statements and no true ones. Onthe contrary, the major rivals to Christianity gain some converts, wemay assume, by including fractions of truth and addressing someperceived human needs. Islam is not wrong in its rejection ofpolytheism and idolatry. Buddhism is right in its belief thatsuffering raises key philosophical questions. However, we shouldavoid saying that God has actually revealed something of his naturethrough these sources, as if their existence were a subset of generalrevelation. Paul may note the Athenians’ religiosity andillustrate a point by quoting one of their poets (Acts 17:22, 28),but his overall polemic makes it clear that he views their ideas asmistaken responses to general revelation. Similar remarks would applyto cults that mix some orthodoxy, based on Scripture, with enougherror to pervert the whole. God is not speaking indistinctly throughthem; rather, they are mishandling what he has said through thebiblical writers. In this sense, therefore, the Bible stands alone asthe unique word of God.
The term “salvation” is the broadest one used torefer to God’s actions to solve the plight brought about byhumankind’s sinful rebellion and its consequences. It is one ofthe central themes of the entire Bible, running from Genesis throughRevelation.
OldTestament
Inmany places in the OT, salvation refers to being rescued fromphysical rather than spiritual trouble. Fearing the possibility ofretribution from his brother Esau, Jacob prays, “Save me, Ipray, from the hand of my brother Esau” (Gen. 32:11). Theactions of Joseph in Egypt saved many from famine (45:5–7;47:25; 50:20). Frequently in the psalms, individuals pray forsalvation from enemies that threaten one’s safety or life (Pss.17:14; 18:3; 70:1–3; 71:1–4; 91:1–3).
Relatedto this usage are places where the nation of Israel and/or its kingwere saved from enemies. The defining example of this is the exodus,whereby God delivered his people from their enslavement to theEgyptians, culminating in the destruction of Pharaoh and his army(Exod. 14:1–23). From that point forward in the history ofIsrael, God repeatedly saved Israel from its enemies, whether througha judge (e.g., Judg. 2:16; 3:9), a king (2Kings 14:27), or evena shepherd boy (1Sam. 17:1–58).
Butthese examples of national deliverance had a profound spiritualcomponent as well. God did not save his people from physical dangeras an end in itself; it was the necessary means for his plan to savethem from their sins. The OT recognizes the need for salvation fromsin (Pss. 39:8; 51:14; 120:2) but, as the NT makes evident, does notprovide a final solution (Heb. 9:1–10:18). One of the clearestplaces that physical and spiritual salvation come together is Isa.40–55, where Judah’s exile from the land and prophesiedreturn are seen as the physical manifestation of the much morefundamental spiritual exile that resulted from sin. To address thatfar greater reality, God announces the day when the Suffering Servantwould once and for all take away the sins of his people (Isa.52:13–53:12).
NewTestament
Asin the OT, the NT has places where salvation refers to being rescuedfrom physical difficulty. Paul, for example, speaks of being savedfrom various physical dangers, including execution (2Cor.1:8–10; Phil. 1:19; 2Tim. 4:17). In the midst of a fiercestorm, Jesus’ disciplescry out, “Lord, save us! We’re going to drown!”(Matt. 8:25). But far more prominent are the places in the Gospelsand Acts where physical healings are described with the verb sōzō,used to speak of salvation from sin. The healing of the woman withthe hemorrhage (Mark 5:25–34), the blind man along the road(Luke 18:35–43), and even the man possessed by a demon (Luke8:26–39), just to name a few, are described with the verb sōzō.The same verb, however, is also used to refer to Jesus forgivingsomeone’ssins (Luke 7:36–50) and to his mission to save the lost fromtheir sins (Luke 19:10). Such overlap is a foretaste of the holisticsalvation (physical and spiritual) that will be completed in the newheaven and earth (Rev. 21–22). The NT Epistles give extensivedescriptions of how the work of Jesus Christ saves his people fromtheir sins (see below).
Components
Inseveral passages (e.g., Rom. 5:1–11; Eph. 2:1–10; Titus3:4–7) “salvation” is clearly a summary term forthe totality of what God has done for his people in and throughChrist. Salvation is such a rich and multifaceted work of God that ittakes a variety of terms to bring out its fullness. “Regeneration”refers to the new life that God imparts, bringing a person fromspiritual death to spiritual life (John 3:3–8; Eph. 2:4–7;Titus 3:4–7). “Justification” speaks of Goddeclaring a person not guilty in his court of law on the basis ofChrist’s sacrificial death and life of perfect obedience (Rom.3:21–5:12; Gal. 2:14–21). “Atonement”describes Christ’s payment for sin and resulting forgiveness(Rom. 3:21–26; Heb. 2:17). “Redemption” capturesthe reality of God paying the price to bring his people out of theirslavery to sin and into the freedom of the Spirit (Gal. 4:1–7;5:1). “Reconciliation” refers to God turning hardenedrebels and enemies into his friends (Rom. 5:10–11; 2Cor.5:18–21; Col. 1:20–22). “Adoption” extendsthat reality into the astonishing truth that God makes those whom hereconciles not just his friends but his sons and daughters (Rom.8:14–25; Gal. 4:1–7). In “sanctification” Godsets his people apart for his special purposes and progressivelychanges them into the image of Christ (1Cor. 1:30 ESV, NRSV,NASB; cf. Rom. 8:29). The final component is “glorification,”when God brings to completion the work of salvation by granting hispeople resurrection bodies, removing every last stain of sin, death,and the curse and placing them in a new heaven and earth (Rom. 8:30;1Cor. 15:35–57; Rev. 21–22).
Prepositionsof Salvation
Anotherway that the Bible fills out the nature of salvation is through thevarious prepositions connected to it. The prepositions in thefollowing list are among the more significant.
From.Since the basic idea of salvation is rescue from danger, it is notsurprising that Scripture describes that from which believers aresaved. David cries out to God, “Save me from all mytransgressions” (Ps. 39:8). Salvation from sin is possible onlythrough Jesus, for it is he who “will save his people fromtheir sins” (Matt. 1:21). Reflecting on the work of Jesus onthe cross, Paul claims that because of the sacrificial death ofChrist believers are saved from God’s wrath (Rom. 5:9–10).At the same time, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus savedpeople from their slavery to sin (Rom. 6:1–11). As a result ofthese and other things from which Christ has saved people, on the dayof Pentecost Peter exhorts his audience to be saved “from thiscorrupt generation” (Acts 2:40). Thus, the unanimous testimonyof Scripture is that believers have been saved from their sin and itsconsequences.
To/into.Believers are saved not merely from something; they are saved to/intocertain states or conditions. Whereas they were once slaves,believers have now been saved “into the freedom and glory ofthe children of God” (Rom. 8:21 [cf. Gal. 5:1]). Through thecross God “has rescued us from the dominion of darkness andbrought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves” (Col. 1:13).Another way of stating this reality is to speak of the peace intowhich believers now have been brought as a result of Christ’swork on their behalf (John 14:27).
By.Scripture frequently uses the preposition “by” to expressthe instrument of salvation. Stated negatively, “It is not bysword or spear that the Lord saves” (1Sam. 17:47). In thebroadest sense, believers are saved from their sins by the gospel(1Cor. 15:1–2). More specifically, salvation is by thegrace of God (Eph. 2:5, 8). The preposition “by” can alsoexpress the agent of salvation. A distinguishing feature of Israelwas that it was saved from its enemies by God (Deut. 33:29; Isa.45:17). The same thing is meant when Scripture speaks of God savinghis people by his right hand (Ps. 17:7) or his name (Ps. 54:1).
Through.The consistent testimony of the Bible is that salvation comes throughfaith (e.g., Eph. 2:8–9). Through faith, believers have beenjustified (Rom. 3:22; 5:1–2) and made children of God (Gal.3:26). It is not righteousness based on the law that matters, “butthat which is through faith in Christ” (Phil. 3:9). Theremarkable actions of God’s people throughout history have beenaccomplished through faith (Heb. 11:1–40).
In.Especially in Paul’s writings the various components ofsalvation (see above) are modified with the phrase “in Christ”or “in him.” Believers are chosen (Eph. 1:4), redeemed(Eph. 1:7), justified (Gal. 2:17), and sanctified (1Cor. 1:2)in Christ. Indeed, God has blessed believers “in the heavenlyrealms with every spiritual blessing in Christ” (Eph. 1:3).
With.Many of the components of salvation that believers experience aresaid to happen “with Christ.” Believers are united withChrist in his death, burial, and resurrection (Rom. 6:4–11;Gal. 2:20). With Christ, believers have been made alive, raised up,and seated in the heavenly realms (Eph. 2:4–6; Col. 2:13).Because of their union with Christ, believers share in hisinheritance (Rom. 8:16–17; Gal. 3:29; 1Pet. 1:4). Eventhe very life of the believer is said to be currently “hiddenwith Christ in God” (Col. 3:3).
Tensesof Salvation
TheBible speaks of salvation in the past, present, and future tenses.Pointing to a definitive experience in the past, Paul tells believersthat “in this hope we were saved” (Rom. 8:24). Yet he canalso speak of himself and other believers as those “who arebeing saved” (1Cor. 1:18; 2Cor. 2:15), pointing toa process that is ongoing. Just a few sentences after assuringbelievers that they have been justified already (Rom. 5:1–2),he can still say that believers will “be saved from God’swrath” through Christ (Rom. 5:9–10).
Theuse of these three tenses reflects the “already and not yet”dynamic of salvation. Through the obedience, death, resurrection, andascension of Jesus, God has rescued his people from their sins. Butthe final and complete realization of all the benefits of salvationmust still await the return of Christ and the establishment of a newheaven and earth (Rev. 19–22).
Conclusion
Withouta proper understanding of humankind’s plight as a result of itsrebellion, the Bible’s repeated emphasis on salvation makeslittle sense. Because sin is humanity’s greatest problem,salvation is humanity’s greatest need. Given the breadth,width, and depth of what God has done to save his people from theirsins through Jesus Christ, it is no wonder that the author of Hebrewsasks, “How shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation?”(2:3).
Slavery and servanthood were part of everyday life in theancient world. There were many different kinds of circ*mstancesthrough which a person might become a slave. Some were coerced intoservitude after being captured in war; others were born into slavery;others served as slaves as a sentence for a crime; still othersserved by personal choice as an apprentice. Slavery was not based onrace. Furthermore, there was an enormous range of social and economicclasses among slaves, from the brutal life of a galley slave to thatof a wealthy servant of a king who might likewise own property andslaves.
Insome cases, manumission, or the freeing of slaves, was possibleduring Roman times. This could be accomplished if the master died orif the master’s will allowed for their freedom, and in somecases slaves could even purchase their own freedom. In the firstcentury AD, there were many such manumitted slaves. Acts 6:9 speaksof a Synagogue of the Freedmen, which probably means that it was madeup of former slaves.
OldTestament
Thereare numerous relationships in the OT that could be characterized asfollowing a servant-master model. These included service to themonarchy (2Sam. 9:2), within households (Gen. 16:8), in thetemple (1Sam. 2:15), or to God himself (Judg. 2:8). We also seeextensive slavery laws in passages such as Exod. 21:1–11; Lev.25:39–55; Deut. 15:12–18. The slavery laws were concernedwith the proper treatment of Hebrew slaves and included guidelinesfor their eventual release and freedom. For example, Hebrew slaveswho had sold themselves to others were to serve for a period of sixyears. On the seventh year, known also as the Year of Jubilee, theywere to be released. Once released, they were not to be sent awayempty-handed, but rather were to be supported from the owner’s“threshing floor” and “winepress.” Slavesalso had certain rights that gave them special privileges andprotection from their masters. Captured slaves, for example, wereallowed rest on the Sabbath (Exod. 20:10) and during special holidays(Deut. 16:11, 14). They could also be freed if their masterpermanently hurt or crippled them (Exod. 21:26–27). Also,severe punishment was imposed on a person who beat a slave to death(Exod. 21:20–21).
Someslaves chose freely to stay with their owner. Deuteronomy 15:16–17speaks of a slave who might say to a master, “I do not want toleave you,” out of love for the master and his family. Thiscommitment was sealed by piercing the earlobe of the slave with anawl. This symbolized a lifelong commitment to the master.
NewTestament
Slaverywas very common in the first century AD, and there were manydifferent kinds of slaves. For example, slaves might live in anextended household (oikos) in which they were born, or they mightchoose to sell themselves into this situation (1Pet. 2:18–25).Although slavery was a significant part of society in the firstcentury AD, we never see Jesus or the apostles encourage slavery.Instead, both Paul and Peter encouraged godly character and obediencefor slaves within this system (Eph. 6:5–8; Col. 3:22–25;1Tim. 6:1–2; Philemon; 1Pet. 2:18–21).Likewise, masters were encouraged to be kind and fair to their slaves(Eph. 6:9; Col. 4:1). Later in the NT, slave trading was condemned bythe apostle Paul as contrary to “sound doctrine” and “thegospel concerning the glory of the blessed God” (1Tim.1:10–11).
Jesusembodied the idea of a servant in word and deed. He fulfilled therole of the “Servant of the Lord,” the Suffering Servantpredicted by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 42:1–4; 50:4–9;52:13–53:12). He also took on the role of a servant in theGospels, identifying himself as the Son of Man who came to serve(Mark 10:45) and washing the disciples’ feet (John 13:4–5).Paul says that in the incarnation Jesus took on “the verynature of a servant” (Phil. 2:7).
Thespecial relationship between Jesus and his followers is captured inthe servant-master language of the NT Epistles, especially in Paul’sletters (Rom. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Titus 1:1). This language focuses notso much on the societal status of these servants as on the allegianceand honor owed to Christ Jesus.
Theimagery of slavery is also used metaphorically in the NT in both anegative and a positive manner. In Rom. 6 the apostle Paul discusseshow slavery and obedience to former and latter masters is anessential part of the changed Christian life. Prior to knowingChrist, we were “slaves to sin” and obeyed its power(Rom. 6:16–17); after following Christ, we were freed from thepower of sin and death and became “slaves to righteousness”(Rom. 6:18) and “slaves of God” (Rom. 6:22).
The Bible has much to say about suffering. While in the OTsuffering is regularly an indication of divine displeasure (Lev.26:16–36; Deut. 28:20–68; Ps. 44:10–12; Isa. 1:25;cf. Heb. 10:26–31), in the NT it becomes the means by whichblessing comes to humanity.
TheBible often shows that sinfulness results in suffering (Gen. 2:17;6:5–7; Exod. 32:33; 2Sam. 12:13–18; Rom. 1:18;1Cor. 11:27–30). Job’s friends mistakenly assumethat he has suffered because of disobedience (Job 4:7–9; 8:3–4,20; 11:6). Job passionately defends himself (12:4; 23:10), and in thefinal chapter of the book God commends Job and condemns his friendsfor their accusations (42:7–8; cf. 1:1, 22; 2:10). The writermakes clear that suffering is not necessarily evidence of sinfulness.Like Job’s friends, Jesus’ disciples assume thatblindness is an indication of sinfulness (John 9:1–2). Jesusrejects this simplistic notion of retributive suffering (John 9:3,6–7; cf. Luke 13:1–5).
Theprayers of suffering people are expressed in the sixteen communal andthirty-seven individual laments in the book of Psalms. Within thelaments the writers describe their problems, express feelings, makerequests, ask questions (“How long, Lord?” [13:1]; “Whyhave you forsaken me?” [22:1]), and lodge complaints againstGod (“My eyes fail, looking for my God [69:3]), enemies (“Youhave made us an object of derision to our neighbors, and our enemiesmock us” [80:6]), and even themselves (“I am a worm andnot a man” [22:6]).
TheNT writers reveal that Jesus’ suffering was prophesied in theOT (Mark 9:12; 14:21; Luke 18:31–32; 24:46; Acts 3:18; 17:3;26:22–23; 1Pet. 1:11; referring to OT texts such as Ps.22; Isa. 52:13–53:12; Zech. 13:7). The Lord Jesus is presentedas the answer to human suffering: (1)Through the incarnation,God’s Son personally experienced human suffering (Phil. 2:6–8;Heb. 2:9; 5:8). (2)Through his suffering, Christ paid the pricefor sin (Rom. 4:25; 3:25–26), so that believers are set freefrom sin (Rom. 6:6, 18, 22) and helped in temptation (Heb. 2:18).(3)Christ Jesus intercedes for his suffering followers (Rom.8:34–35). (4)Christ is the example in suffering (1Pet.2:21; 4:1; cf. Phil. 3:10; 2Cor. 1:5; 4:10; 1Pet. 4:13),and though he died once for sins (Heb. 10:12), he continues to sufferas his church suffers (Acts 9:4–5). (5)Christ provideshope of resurrection (Rom. 6:5; 1Cor. 15:20–26; Phil.3:10–11) and a future life without suffering or death (Rev.21:4).
Thereare many NT examples of suffering believers (John 15:20–21;Acts 4:3; 5:18; 7:57–60; 8:1–3; 12:1–5; 14:19;16:22–24; 18:17; 2Cor. 6:4–5, 8–10; Heb.10:32; 1Pet. 5:9; Rev. 2:10). Suffering is part of God’splan for his people (Acts 9:16; 1Thess. 3:2–4) and ispart of what it means to be a follower of Christ Jesus (Acts 14:22;Rom. 8:17; Phil. 1:29; 1Pet. 2:21; 4:12).
TheNT writers repeatedly mention the benefits of suffering, for it hasbecome part of God’s work of redemption. The suffering ofbelievers accompanies the proclamation and advancement of the gospel(Acts 5:41–42; 9:15–16; 2Cor. 4:10–11;6:2–10; Phil. 1:12, 27–29; 1Thess. 2:14–16;2Tim. 1:8; 4:5) and results in salvation (Matt. 10:22; 2Cor.1:6; 1Thess. 2:16; 2Tim. 2:10; Heb. 10:39), faith (Heb.10:32–34, 38–39; 1Pet. 1:7), the kingdom of God(Acts 14:22), resurrection from the dead (Phil. 3:10–11), andthe crown of life (Rev. 2:10). It is an essential part of thedevelopment toward Christian maturity (Rom. 5:3–4; 2Cor.4:11; Heb. 12:4; James 1:3–4; 1Pet. 1:7; 4:1).
Sufferingis associated with knowing Christ (Phil. 3:10); daily inward renewal(2Cor. 4:16); purity, understanding, patience, kindness,sincere love, truthful speech, the power of God (2Cor. 4:4–10);comfort and endurance (2Cor. 1:6); obedience (Heb. 5:8);blessing (1Pet. 3:14; 4:14); glory (Rom. 8:17; 2Cor.4:17); and joy (Matt. 5:12; Acts 5:41; 2Cor. 6:10; 12:10; James1:2; 1Pet. 1:6; 4:13). Other positive results of Christiansuffering include perseverance (Rom. 5:3; James 1:3), character andhope (Rom. 5:4), strength (2Cor. 12:10), and maturity andcompleteness (James 1:4). Present suffering is light and momentarywhen compared to future glory (Matt. 5:10–12; Acts 14:22; Rom.8:18; 2Cor. 4:17; Heb. 10:34–36; 1Pet. 1:5–7;4:12–13).
Throughoutthe Bible, believers are instructed to help those who suffer. The OTlaw provides principles for assisting the poor, the disadvantaged,and the oppressed (Exod. 20:10; 21:2; 23:11; Lev. 19:13, 34; 25:10,35; Deut. 14:28–29; 15:1–2; 24:19–21). Jesusregularly taught his followers to help the poor (Matt. 5:42; 6:3;19:21; 25:34–36; Luke 4:18; 12:33; 14:13, 21). It is believers’responsibility to show mercy (Matt. 5:7; 9:13), be generous (Rom.12:8; 2Cor. 8:7; 1Tim. 6:18), mourn with mourners (Rom.12:15), carry other’s burdens (Gal. 6:1–2), and visitprisoners (Matt. 25:36, 43). See also Servant of the Lord.
Showing
1
to
50
of267
results
1. A Story of Conversion
Illustration
Philip Schaff
John Chrysostom, known as the "the golden-mouthed" preacher of the 4th century, told the story of a remarkable conversion. The coastal city of Phoenice was well known for its lawlessness. Inparticular in the city was an actress who mesmerized many with her beauty but brought them low with her harlotry and the use of sorcery and drugs.
Chrysostom wrote, "And indeed nothing was more vile than she was, when she was on the stage." Yet remarkably, by the grace of God, this notable lady was suddenly converted. "But all at once, I know not how," he tells the story, "or rather I do know well, for it was being so minded, and converting, and bringing down upon herself God's grace, she despised all those things and having cast away the arts of the devils, mounted up to heaven." In the spirit of Romans 6, as she had given herself to all manner of sin as an unbeliever, now as a Christian, she devoted her all to the Lord Jesus Christ and His pleasure (Rom. 6:12-19). Her attire changed, as did her practices and the company that she kept. Her life of discipline and self-restraint demonstrated a transformed heart. For many years, she bowed only to her own authority over her soul, but upon meeting Jesus Christ through faith, the woman who once was a noted harlot became a radiant follower of Jesus Christ.[See: A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, edited by Philip Schaff, vol. X, "Saint Chrysostom: Homilies on the Gospel of Saint Matthew," 412].
2. The Gravity of Sin
Illustration
Michael P. Green
How can sin be rendered powerless, as Paul says in Romans 6:6? Consider the effect of gravity on a book. Gravity would cause an unsupported book to fall, but gravity can be rendered “powerless” against the book by simply placing a table under it. As long as the table is under the book, gravity cannot cause it to fall. Of course gravity has not really lost its power nor is it no longer present. It is just that the table is “stronger” than gravity’s effect on the book.
For the Christian, the Holy Spirit is like that table and our sin nature is like gravity’s pull. As long as we allow the Holy Spirit to hold us up, which places our dependence on his power to give us victory over sin, our sinful impulses have no power to pull us down.
3. The Forgiveness Business
Illustration
Brian Stoffregen
I have frequently quoted Robert Capon's comments that the church is not in the morals business. The world does a pretty good job of that. What the world can't get right is the forgiveness business which is the church's proper job.
From a slightly different angle, he writes in Between Noon and Three: Morality, by its very nature, must be concerned with norms, with standards; whereas grace, by definition, is concerned with persons: it is a refusal to allow the standards to become the basis of their reconciliation or condemnation. Thus the conflict: morality tells you the standard you need to meet in order to be properly alive; grace tells you that all you ultimately need is to be dead – which is either the world's lowest standard or no standard at all.
Grace and morality, therefore, are two different kettles of fish. Morality deals with virtue and vice, with what is strengthening or weakening for human nature considered as an operational possibility. Grace, however, deals with sin, with a condition in which human nature has ceased to be an operational possibility and has ended up a lost cause. Grace is, to say it once again, about raising the dead. In the Bible the opposite of sin is not virtue; it is faith – faith in God who raises the dead.
All this talk about morality, therefore, is misleading. When we get far enough into it we begin to convince ourselves that the preaching of the moral law will, if done energetically enough, lead people to lead good lives and so make them more like what they ought to be. But that's not biblical. St. Paul says that the purpose of the law was not to do that at all, but to bring us to the awareness of sin. We sit here talking as if proper moral instruction to fifteen-year-olds will somehow keep them clear of sin. But St. Paul says that Scripture has concluded – locked up – all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. [pp. 157-8]
The goal of our preaching is not more moral behaviors, but forgiveness. I have often said that the primary purpose of sermons is absolution. While there may be instructions, and illustrations, and jokes, etc., if the forgiveness of sins through Jesus is not proclaimed in some way, I think that the sermon (and the church) has failed in its God-given purpose.
4. Do As You Please
Illustration
Michael Horton
The radical gospel of grace as it is found throughout Scripture, has always had its critics. Jimmy Swaggart once said that by trusting in God's justifying and preserving grace, we would end up living a life of sin before long and thus, lose our salvation and be consigned to hell. Paul anticipated that reaction from the religious community of his own day after he said, "Where sin abounded, grace abounded much more" (Romans 5:20, NKJV). So he asked the question he expected us to ask: "Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" (6:1) Should we sin so that we can receive more grace? In other words, "If people believed what you just said in Romans 5, Paul, wouldn't they take advantage of the situation and live like the dickens, knowing they were 'safe and secure from all alarm'?" That's a fair question. But it reveals a basic misunderstanding of the nature of God's saving grace. Paul's response is unmistakable: "Certainly not? How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?" (Romans 6:2, NKJV).
Someone confronted Martin Luther, upon the Reformer's rediscovery of the biblical doctrine of justification, with the remark, "If this is true, a person could simply live as he pleased!"
"Indeed!" answered Luther. "Now, what pleases you?"
Augustine was the great preacher of grace during the fourth and fifth centuries. Although his understanding of the doctrine of justification did not have the fine-tuned precision of the Reformers, Augustine's response on this point was similar to Luther's. He said that the doctrine of justification led to the maxim, "Love God and do as you please." Because we have misunderstood one of the gospel's most basic themes, Augustine's statement looks to many like a license to indulge one's sinful nature, but in reality it touches upon the motivation the Christian has for his actions. The person who has been justified by God's grace has a new, higher, and nobler motivation for holiness than the shallow, hypocritical self-righteousness or fear that seems to motivate so many religious people today.
5. I Am a Sinner Still
Illustration
Martin Luther
I do not come because my soul
is free from sin and pure and whole
and worthy of Thy grace;
I do not speak to Thee because
I've ever justly kept Thy laws
and dare to meet Thy face.
I know that sin and guilt combine
to reign o'er every thought of mine
and turn from good to ill;
I know that when I try to be
upright and just and true to Thee,
I am a sinner still.
I know that often when I strive
to keep a spark of love alive
for Thee, the powers within
Leap up in unsubmissive might
and oft benumb my sense of right
and pull me back to sin.
I know that though in doing good
I spend my life, I never could
atone for all I've done;
But though my sins are black as night,
I dare to come before Thy sight
because I trust Thy Son.
In Him alone my trust I place,
come boldly to Thy throne of grace,
and there commune with Thee.
Salvation sure, O Lord, is mine,
and, all unworthy, I am Thine,
for Jesus died for me.
6. Blasphemy Against the Spirit
Illustration
Staff
This statement (Matt 12:32, par Mk. 3:29, Luke 12:10) has been the subject of much questioning. Obviously the reference here is not to the naming of the Holy Spirit in a blasphemous utterance, for in Matt. 12:32 even blasphemy against the Son of man can be forgiven. Among the many attempts at exegesis, the most convincing is the suggestion that the man who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit is he who has recognized that God is working through the Holy Spirit in the actions of Jesus, and who quite consciously "misrepresent faith in God as faith in the devil. This saying is an extremely serious warning against the demonic and scarcely conceivable potential in man: To declare war on God. This is not done in weakness and doubt, but by one who has been overcome by the Holy Spirit and who knows very well on whom he is declaring war" (E. Schweizer, The Good News according to Mark, 1971, 87; cf. H.W. Beyer, TDNT I:624; O.E. Evans, "The Unforgivable Sin", ExpT 68, 1956-57, 240-44). This is the blasphemer who does it deliberately, after encounter with the God of grace, as the context shows. For Jesus has just been accused of casting out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons. "Therefore he who blasphemes the Spirit is no longer speaking against a God who is distant, about whom he entertains mere foolish thoughts, but against the one who makes evident to him his gracious work, and confirms it with his manifest, divine seal. He is a man who ought to give thanks, not to blaspheme" (A. Schlatter, on Matt. 12:32).
W.L. Lane draws attention to Sifre on Deut. 32:38 (end): "The Holy One, blessed be he, pardons everything else, but on profanation of the Name [i.e. blasphemy] he takes vengeance immediately" (The Gospel of Mark, NLC, 1974, 145) Lane goes on to comment: "This is the danger to which the scribes exposed themselves when they attributed to the agency of Satan the redemption brought by Jesus. The expulsion of demons was a sign of the intrusion of the Kingdom of God. Yet the scribal accusations against Jesus amount to a denial of the power and greatness of the Spirit of God. By assigning the action of Jesus to a demonic origin the scribes betray a perversion of spirit which, in defiance of the truth, chooses to call light darkness. In this historical context, blasphemy against the Holy Spirit denotes the conscious and deliberate rejection of the saving power and grace of God released through Jesus' work and act" (ibid). Thus blasphemy here is much more serious than the taking of the divine name in vain which a believer may have done before coming to repentance and faith.
It may be said to those who have been tormented by fear that they have committed the unforgivable sin that their concern is itself a sign that they have not committed the sin envisaged in Jesus' teaching here. Lane's interpretation also helps to explain the distinction drawn between blasphemy against the Son of man and blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. The distinction suggests that "while an attack on Jesus' own person, as son of Man and therefore 'hidden', is pardonable, any speaking against the power by which he works (i.e. the divine endowment for his messianic ministry) will not be pardoned" (D. Hill, The Gospel of Matthew, New Century Bible, 1972, 318). For such an action would be deliberately to attribute to Satan the action of God himself. (NIDNTT, v. 3, pp. 343-344)
What is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? Though many suggestions have been offered, I think the answer lies in the context here (Luke 12:7-12) and in the context of redemptive history. Remember that the Holy Spirit had not yet been poured out, and it is the Spirit who causes men to recognize who Jesus is. Hebrews 6 and 10 contain discussions of unforgivable sins, but the distinction between blasphemy against Christ and the Spirit has disappeared. Jesus seemed to be saying this: Because the Holy spirit has not yet been poured out in fullness, the Jews will be forgiven for blaspheming the Son of Man. They will be given a second chance to repent, as we see in the book of Acts. If, however, they continue to blaspheme after the Spirit has come, they will not be forgiven. But what is the sin, specifically? Since it is blasphemy, we must see it essentially as a verbal sin. In context it is the sin of saying that Jesus Christ is of the devil. Jesus was willing to excuse this blasphemy before Pentecost; but, in the new covenant era it is not longer excusable. If a person curses Jesus, but does not really know who Jesus is, that sin is forgivable. But if the Holy Spirit has borne witness to a person that Jesus is indeed the Son of God, and that person curses Him, it cannot be forgiven.
7. A House of Prayer
Illustration
John R. Brokhoff
Leslie Weatherhead in his book, A Private House Of Prayer, suggests that the structure of the content of prayer be likened to a house of seven rooms. Each room is a division of prayer. There may be some duplication with ACTSS which we just discussed.
The first room is for the affirmation of God's presence. If prayer is a conversation with God, obviously it is necessary for him to be present. When we pray, are we aware of his presence or like Moses do we see only a burning bush? In a hymn Tersteegen sings, "God himself is present; let us now adore him and with awe appear before him." What applies to worship, applies also to prayer. When we pray, we are talking to a real person, not to an idea, or ideal, or ideology, or a theological concept. In prayer we are not talking to ourselves or to the ceiling. In spirit God is there to hear our prayer. We need to realize this and pray accordingly.
The next room is for the thanksgiving and praise. We have been blessed beyond measure and therefore to thank and praise God is in order. Before we begin our prayer, we need to review how good God has been to us. If we are bereft of blessings, our greatest gift is Jesus who loved us enough to die for us.
Go to the next room for the confession of sins. Sin separates us from God. Sin erects an impenetrable curtain which prevents us from seeing God. The separation prevents our hearing the voice of God. We come out of a dirty world with the dirt of sin clinging to us. Before we can be presentable to a holy God we need spiritual cleansing. Thus, in prayer we confess our sins and plead for his mercy.
The fourth room is labelled "Reception of God's grace." We have confessed our sins and begged for mercy. What is God's response? It is grace in terms of pardon and acceptance. At this time in our prayers we remember his promises to be with us always, to forgive us, and to bless us with the Holy Spirit.
Now it is time to go to the room of petition. We have the opportunity to tell God about our personal needs in our own lives, or in our family, or in our work. But, we have petitions not only for ourselves, but others want and need our prayers in their behalf. This takes us to the sixth room of prayer. When we pray for others, it is called intercessory prayer. When his co-worker, Melanchthon, was sick, Luther prayed for him: "I besought the Almighty with great vigor ... quoting from Scripture all the promises I could remember, that prayers should be granted and said that he must grant my prayer, if I was henceforth to put faith in his promises."
The effectiveness of a friend's prayer on our behalf depends on the relationship of the pray-er to God. James wrote, "The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective" (James 5:16). That is why we want a godly mother or a pious pastor to pray for us. Roman Catholics ask the saints and the Virgin Mary to pray for them. On the eve of a historic boxing match, a friend was visiting the champ in his hotel suite. During the conversation a murmuring feminine voice was heard. "That's my wife," the champ explained. "She's praying for me to win." "Oh, and I suppose you pray, too?" The champ replied, "My wife is more devout than I am. If God won't do it for her, He certainly won't do it for me."
The seventh room in the house of prayer is meditation. Some do not understand what meditation is and consequently do not know how to meditate. It is the act of reflecting, of silence, and listening to God. It calls for thinking about God and our relationship to him. It is a time to review past dealings with God. Then we reflect on how good God has been in those past dealings. After that, we remember God's promises to us: promises of peace, protection, and provision. Meditation can be summed up in three R's: review, reflect, and remember.
8. Taking the Fun Out of Christmas
Illustration
We prepare for Christmas by repenting. Repenting in the Biblical sense is more than having a change of heart or a feeling of regret. It is more than a New Year's Eve resolution. Repentance is a turning away and a turning back. A turning away from sin and a turning back to God.
Bishop Joe Pennel of the Virginia Conference of the United Methodist Church, once attended a Christmas worship service in Bethlehem at a place called Shepherd's Field. As he heard the songs of the season, he thought to himself and later wrote: "I did not look to God and say: See how virtuous I am. I did not utter: God, pat me on the back for all of the good things I have done. I did not pretend by saying: God, look at all of my accomplishments, aren't you proud of me? Indeed, I found myself asking God to forgive me of my sins. That is how it works. The more we turn away from Christ the more enslaved we become to the power of sin. The more we turn to Christ, the more free we become from the bondage of sin. Turning toward Christ enables us to repent."
Someone once said half jokingly: If we are not careful, John the Baptist can take all of the fun out of Christmas. I disagree. I think that it is John's message that puts the joy into Christmas. For it is his message that calls us not to the way that Christmas is, but that the way Christmas ought to be. Christmas ought to be free from guilt and self-absorption. For that to occur there must be repentance.
9. Spite Houses
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
There once was a millionaire who owned a lot in an exclusive residential area of New York City. This particular lot presented a very unusual problem. The lot was five feet wide and about a hundred feet long. He couldn't do anything with such an odd sized lot, so he decided to sell it one of the neighbors on either side. But when he went to the neighbors, they didn't want to give him anything for it. They basically said, "Look, you can't build on it and you can't sell it to anyone else. So take our offer or leave it." The millionaire was so angered by their refusal and rebuttal that he decided to get even.
He hired an architect and a contractor, and had a house designed for that weird shaped lot. It was five feet wide and ran the entire length of the property. He moved in and set up house in this narrow house. Each room was barely wide enough for a single piece of furniture. His hatred for the people on either side of this small lot made him decide to ruin the look of the entire area.
The neighbors complained that it was a blight to the neighborhood. But the city fathers couldn't find any code forbidding it. This millionaire moved into it, and lived there the rest of his life. The only one who was really punished was him. He moved into a long narrow little house that held only hate and discomfort. The house became known throughout the neighborhood as "Spite House." It still stands to day as a monument to one man's hatred.
When I first read that story, I thought, surely this is an exaggeration. So, I did some research trying to find out whether this was a true story or just one of those myths that has been passed on. Not only did I find out that it was true. I found out the man's name. But what was even more shocking is the fact that I found no less than eight other "Spite Houses" in a simple search online.
There's one in Carlsbad, New Mexico, built to block the Mayor's view and annoy him. There are two in San Francisco; One at Deadman's Point, Maine; one in Huntsville, Alabama; one in Boston, one that is supposed to be haunted and has been turned into a Bed & Breakfast in Fredrick, Maryland; and a triangle shaped "Spite House" in Montlake, Washington, a suburb of Seattle.
Our passage today from the Gospel of Matthew is the parable of the ungrateful servant. It's story about our debt of sin. It's about God's free and redeeming grace. It's also about anger and spite, and the judgment that follows an unforgiving spirit. Let's look at the passage.
Note: This story is essentially true but the reasons for construction are a little different:The Richardson Spite House, as it is known, in New York City at Lexington Avenue and 82nd Street was built in 1882 and demolished in 1915. It was four stories tall, 104 feet (31.7 m) wide, and only five feet (1.5 m) deep. Joseph Richardson, the owner of the plot, built it after the owner of an adjacent plot, Hyman Sarner, unsuccessfully tried to purchase the land. Sarner considered the plot useless by itself and offered only $1000; Richardson demanded $5000. After the deal fell through, Richardson had an apartment building constructed on his land. It was a functional (albeit impractical) apartment building with eight suites, each consisting of three rooms and a bath.
A Spite House is a building constructed or substantially modified to irritate neighbors or any party with land stakes. Because long-term occupation is not the primary purpose of these houses, they frequently sport strange and impractical structures.
10. IN THE PROVERBIAL PITS
Illustration
John H. Krahn
Most of us think we are pretty good - not worthy of going to hell. In commercials we are told to use a variety of products. Why? Because we are worth it. Commercials and best-selling books discourage us from seeing ourselves in a negative light, unable to be in control over every situation in life - even over our life beyond life.
Therefore, if someone says to you, "Go to hell," it is an affront. The person who says such a thing infers that in his opinion you are not number one but that you are the pits. We have no right to say such a thing, for it is much like the pot calling the kettle black. Yet, when Jesus Christ returns to earth at the end of time, he will have to tell billions of people to "Go to hell." Why? Because all people are sinners and cannot save themselves. Until we recognize our sinfulness, we will never desire a savior. The problem is that we all think we’re pretty good people. Compared to what? - other sinners, maybe - but not to a righteous God.
And what is the Bible’s standard for salvation? Jesus told us when he said, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as my father in heaven is perfect." Perfection. One hundred percent is the only passing grade. God doesn’t grade on a curve. The Book of James puts it another way, "If we offend in one point we are guilty of all." If we commit just one sin, we step outside the realm of the law and become an outlaw. You don’t have to break every law in the book to be a criminal - just kill one person.
Sin is a "four-letter word" ... a dirty word, that will someday keep us out of heaven if left alone. It puts us in the proverbial pits. It is a cancer of the soul, and if left untreated, it brings everlasting death. I cannot imagine anything more awful than to stand before the Lord Jesus at the end of time, and have him say, "John, go to hell!" Satan works overtime to delude us into thinking that we are good enough to make it to heaven on our own. If we want to know how black and hideous our hearts are in the sight of God, we need only take a long look at the cross. God considered our sin so terrible and our lives so important that he sent his Son to the cross to die for us.
Heaven is a free gift and is not earned or deserved. Grace is God’s riches at Christ’s expense. People are sinners and cannot save themselves. Our sinful condition will lead to eternal death if left unchecked. If we accept God’s gift of forgiveness through Jesus Christ, we can have the confidence of everlasting life in heaven.
11. Symbols of Slavery
Illustration
Editor James S. Hewett
In 1838, after a strong emancipation movement among blacks, slavery was abolished in Jamaica, to take effect on August 1. On the evening of the last day in July a large company of former slaves gathered on the beach for a solemn, yet joyous, occasion. A large mahogany coffin had been constructed and placed on the sand next to an accommodating hole in the beach. All evening the soon-to-be-emancipated slaves placed, with some ceremony, symbols of their enslavement. There were chains, leg-irons, whips, padlocks, and ocher similar symbols of slavery. A few minutes before midnight came the box was lowered into the hole in the beach. Pushing sand into the hole to cover the coffin, all joined their voices with one accord to sing: "Praise God from whom all blessings flow, praise him all creatures here below, praise him above ye heavenly host, praise Father, Son and Holy Ghost." They were free from their slavery. How much they were like Christians, who, through Christ’s death are free from their slavery to sin. And how like them are Christians, who in heaven shall be free from the very reminder and presence of sin.
12. Set Free To Obey
Illustration
Michael P. Green
When a man is released from prison, he is not free to do anything he feels like doing, but he is free to obey the law. In the same way, when we are freed from sin by trusting in Christ, we are not given a license to sin, but rather are set free to obey him.
13. Shaping People’s Lives through Forgiveness - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
At the University of Notre Dame in 1981 a rather prophetic lecture was given that predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union. The lecturer called Communism "a sad, bizarre chapter in human history whose last pages are even now being written." A year later the same speaker told the British House of Commons that the march of freedom and democracy "will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash heap of history." Years later, in 1988, students at Moscow University sat and listened as this same speaker told them how the microchip would lead the way in expanding human freedom. Indeed, even that prediction is coming true. The Internet may be playing a critical role in dismantling china's communism. Remember now that this 1988, long before the advent of the Internet.
Who was this Speaker? This lecturer who looked into the future and was able to rightly discern where history was taking us? It was Ronald Reagan. Putting political preferences aside for just a moment I think all of us would have to agree that on at least a few crucial issues Reagan got it right. He looked into the future and steered us correctly. What is it that gives some people the ability to look at a situation and rightly sized it up? It seems to be a kind of gift doesn't it?
This is one of the qualities that separate the great men from the ordinary. In our story this morning (in Luke 7) certain insights are being expressed. A gathering of men at a dinner party has just witnessed a woman, who they all know to be a woman of ill repute, walk into the room with an alabaster jar of expensive perfume. She walks up behind Jesus and kneels. She is crying. As she weeps her tears fall onto his feet. She uses her hair as a towel to dry his feet and then she pours the expensive perfume on his feet. This is the scene and it is a sudden departure from the evening's festivities. But it now becomes the focal point of Jesus' teachings.
Now, listen to how the Pharisee sizes up the situation. He has two insights. On the first he is correct and on the second he is incorrect. Here they are: First he is correct about the lady. She was known in the community as a sinner. Her sin is not revealed to us but most of us could come pretty close in guessing it. Whatever it was the Pharisee rightly judged the woman's character. But here is where he failed. His insights and perceptions about Jesus were wrong. He said that if Jesus were a prophet he would know that this woman was a sinner and he would not let her touch him.
The Pharisee was wrong because the character of this woman was not lost on Jesus. And here is the beautiful part of the passage. Jesus knew who she was but he had moved beyond that to forgive the woman her sins. Jesus sizes up the situation and recognizes that grace is needed in this woman's life.
Now let's ask ourselves this question. Whether we are looking at an incredibly destructive institution or the loathsome practice of prostitution, whatever sin we find in the world are we able to look beyond the facts, size up the situation, see down the road and know what kind of grace is needed? We can do this if we can:
1. Be honest and call sin sin.
2. Use these moments to teach others.
3. Remember that redemption always wins in the end.
14. The Waters of Death & Life
Illustration
Paul Peterson
Those who are baptized in Jesus do not need to strive after a new life. They have already attained new life through dying with Christ. But they do need to nurture that new life so it can grow and mature. That's what church is for. That's what Bible study is for. That's what prayer is for. It is like the Parable of the Sower. Many of those seeds sprouted up, but only a few grew into maturity. The rest withered and died.
A wealthy businessman was horrified to see a fisherman sitting beside his boat, playing with a small child.
"Why aren't you out fishing?" asked the businessman.
"Because I caught enough fish for one day, "replied the fisherman.
"Why don't you catch some more?"
"What would I do with them?"
"You could earn more money," said the businessman. "Then with the extra money, you could buy a bigger boat, go into deeper waters, and catch more fish.Then you would make enough money to buy nylon nets. With the nets, you could catch even more fish and make more money. With that money you could own two boats, maybe three boats. Eventually you could have a whole fleet of boats and be rich like me."
"Then what would I do?" asked the fisherman.
"Then," said the businessman, "you could really enjoy life."
The fisherman looked at the businessman quizzically and asked, "What do you think I am doing now?"
Are you striving afternew life or are you already there, enjoying it, finding rest inChrist. If not I invite you to be baptized and share in the peace and rest only God can give.
15. Death and Resurrection
Illustration
We, as human beings, whoever we are and whatever station in life we are in, all stand on common ground when we realize that we all at sometime in life fear death, we all live in the presence of death, that all men, in some way or another, have been hurt by death. And it does not only touch the life of the elderly. In his preface of "Bread For the World", Author Simon reminds us that before we complete reading this brief preface that four people in the world will have died of starvation, most of them children. So no matter who you are, whether you are in the sunset years and expect to live fewer years than you have lived to date, or whether you are just beginning life's journey—death is real. All of the wars in the world have not increased the death toll by one. It robs people of valuable years of their life but it in no way increases the death toll, for all of us, one day, shall have to go through the experience of death.
I have always wondered about the cynics and non-believers. What do they do at Easter? Have you ever wondered about that. On that day when the Christian church joyfully celebrates the resurrection of Jesus Christ, what do they do. Humanism is all right for the classroom, but it leaves you nothing at an icy graveside. It is precisely at that point that Christianity responds: Yes, we shall see our loved ones again and all be reunited.
Some demand that they need proof and documentation. I wonder what kind proof that they desire. There is more documented evidence that Jesus Christ rose from the dead than there is that Julius Caesar ever lived. There is more evidence of the resurrection than there is that Alexander the Great died at age 33. I have always found it interesting that some will accept thousands of facts for which there are only shreds of evidence, but in the face of overwhelming evidence of the resurrection they cast a skeptical doubt, because it is so unique. We say that we want the facts. Well the facts are that in the history of the ancient world the resurrection has been attested to as much as most of the events that we routinely accept and read in the history books.
In the early nineties the ABC news show 20/20 had an interesting segment on the shroud of Turin. If you were completely out of touch at that time and have not heard of the shroud of Turin, let me tell you that it is supposed to be the cloth that Jesus was buried in. And on this cloth is an imprint of the person of Jesus. It is now housed in a cathedral in Turin, Italy. Several years ago an international team of scientists, consisting of Christians, Jews, Moslems, and non-believers, set about to prove or disprove the story behind this ancient cloth. The results of their findings were published in an issue of National Geographic magazine.
The interesting thing to me about the 20/20 story was an interview that they had with one of the scientists, an Air Force colonel who was a specialist in laser technology. He openly admitted that he began the project not only as a non-Christian, but as a person who was openly anti-religious. I relished this opportunity, he said, to debunk what I considered a childish myth. Haraldo Rivera asked him: Now that you have spent four years on this project what is your response. His response not only shocking, but it was shocking that 20/20 allowed it to go on the air. He said: After four years on this project, I now fall upon my knees and worship a resurrected Christ.
It would be nice if we could hold some physical evidence in our hands to prove it all, but I would mislead you this Easter Day if I left the impression that the resurrection was a matter of fact. For in the end, the resurrection is a religious belief. In the end you cannot prove it or disprove it. And that is why some brilliant people believe and why some brilliant people do not believe. Because you cannot prove it one way or the other. There just are not any photographs. In the end we must fall back upon the words of the resurrected Christ to the disciple Thomas: Thomas, you have believed because you have seen. Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe.
16. Letting the Sun Shine In
Illustration
Stephen M. Crotts
Try this experiment when you get home today. Take a trash can lid and lay it on a healthy portion of your lawn. Leave it there for a week. Afterward, lift the lid and look under it. See the pale, sickly grass? See the roaches and worms nesting in the dark decay of the withered grass. That's what sin does to us!
Put the lid back down on the grass. Does the grass have the power to remove the lid all by itself? No. That's impossible. And again, we are like the man in our text with an impossible debt to the king. We are helpless to free ourselves.
Finish the experiment. Take the lid away. The bugs flee. The grass begins to receive sunshine and moisture. Its health is revived, restored. It is literally forgiven, let loose from bondage and decay. Forgiveness is just like that. What we can't pay, God pays. God lets us loose from debts of sin and frees us to new life!
17. We Are Dying All the Time
Illustration
Todd Weir
The truth is parts of us are dying all the time.You probably just lost half a million or so cells just reading this sentence.We all lose about 100,000 cells per second.Fortunately, just as many cells are being reproduced in a healthy body.Healthy bodies have this constant cycle of dying cells and rebirth of new ones.Some scientists say that we are regenerated every seven years, which is an enormous relief to me.Apparently, cells that don't die off in the normal cycle are a real problem.These cells are related to diseases like cancer and become problematic because they get in the way and block healthy development of the body.
This is true in the spiritual and emotional life as well."Those who love their life will lose it, but those who love their lives for my sake will save it."(Luke's words are better here because there is so much more at stake than heaven in these words.)Our failure to let go and let some things die is a primary spiritual disease, for new life can't come without some death.The failure to forgive leads to death of relationship while anger and bitterness ravage the spirit like a cancer.Holding on to regrets strangles hope before it can lift us to new life.Trying to control events and other people leads to frustration, excessive stress, and exhaustion.Forgiveness and letting go of control are spiritual exercises in the art of dying so that new life may abound.
18. REMEMBER YOUR BAPTISM
Illustration
John H. Krahn
On January 26, 1905, in Pretoria, South Africa, Captain M. F. Wells found a diamond weighing one and one-quarter pounds. Two years later, the diamond was purchased and presented to King Edward VII of the United Kingdom. In 1908, a diamond cutter from Amsterdam cut from that diamond the Star of Africa, the largest cut diamond in the world, containing seventy-four facets with a weight of 530 carats. Today, the diamond is still set in the British Royal Scepter. Can you imagine the value of such a jewel?
Then there is the Hope Diamond: the largest blue diamond in the world. It weighs in at 44.4 carats. Found in India during the seventeenth century, it has been displayed, since 1958, at the Smithsonian Institute in Washington, D.C. At that time it was worth between $700,000 and $1,500,000.
But diamonds are not the most precious of gems. Since 1955 rubies have been the world’s most precious gem, attaining a price of up to $30,000 per carat. Can you imagine what the Burmese Ruby, weighing 1,184 carats, would be worth? To have in our possession one of these jewels would be to have one of the most beautiful and most valued jewels in the world. Imagine how it would feel wearing the Hope Diamond set into a ring. Well, most of us already possess a jewel of even greater value.
In his Large Catechism, Martin Luther makes this concluding statement about Holy Baptism: "No greater jewel can adorn our body or soul than Baptism: For through it, perfect holiness and salvation become accessible to us, which are otherwise beyond the reach of man’s life and energy." I am sure if any of us owned one of the great gems of the world, we would not easily forget about it. Rather we would feel good about it, share its beauty by wearing it, be careful to protect it, and treasure it. Yet our beautiful adornment of Baptism is often forgotten. Weeks go by without us even considering our jewel of Baptism.
Saint Paul reminds us in Romans that through Baptism we were buried with Christ in his death. Baptism joins us to Christ and through it we receive the forgiveness that his death affords. Paul says, "We were buried therefore with him by Baptism into death,... so that as Christ has been raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life."
All of us from time to time have felt that we needed a change; some have even dreamed of a new life, a new beginning. New life, our new beginning, not only happens on the day we are baptized but can extend to every day. As we daily remember our Baptism, we welcome the benefits of Baptism. Benefits that come from a powerful God who offers help and peace to children who call upon his name. Benefits of renewed joy snatched from sorrow, renewed strength formed out of weakness and the ability to forgive someone you would naturally want to hate.
Because we believe and are baptized, we also remember that our eternal future is certain - however uncertain our earthly life might be. We are family. And when we die, we know that God the Father has already made provisions for a great reunion party in heaven. A new life in heaven is ours as we join the forever family of God.
19. How The Mighty Have Fallen!
Illustration
Richard A. Jensen
"How the mighty have fallen." King David of old once spoke those words concerning the death of King Saul. "How the mighty have fallen." These words have transcended the Bible and become the language of popular culture. A newspaper report a few years ago on some pastors who had fallen from grace used this biblical passage as its headline. The article was about two well-known television preachers -- Jimmy Swaggart and Jim Bakker -- whose sins had been publicly exposed. "How the mighty have fallen" the newspaper headline gloated! Jimmy Swaggart is an interesting case in point.
Newsweek magazine once carried an article that featured this highly talented preacher. The article quoted one man as saying that Jimmy Swaggart was one of the most entertaining people on television in any field. The man didn't believe what Swaggart preached but he was dazzled by his entertainment and communication skills. "How the mighty have fallen!" Swaggart's sin seemed to be his fascination with p*rnography. One who knew him well over the years said: "His weakness for p*rnography finally beat him. He's fasted and prayed many times to overcome this weakness." Swaggart's weakness for p*rnography often led him to Louisiana brothels. It doesn't appear to be the case that Swaggart had sex with these women. He just asked them to pose for him in some suggestive ways. One night as he was leaving a brothel, however, someone who was out to expose him took some pictures. The pictures undid him. Scandal raged. Swaggart faced his congregation with tears running down his cheeks and remorse in his heart.
The response to Swaggart's fall was highly judgmental. People judged Swaggart harshly because he had been so judgmental in his preaching. In his judgments he came down on all sorts and varieties of people, including Christian people. Of the ministry of Jim Bakker, for example, Swaggart had said: "He's a cancer on the body of Christ that needs to be excised." Swaggart's preaching was judgmental indeed.
Swaggart was also judged harshly because of the peculiar nature of his message. Swaggart's message went beyond the proclamation of Jesus Christ to be a message fundamentally about the holiness work of the Holy Spirit. He proclaimed over and over again that through the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives we can overcome all sin. Thus he judged sinners. He invited sinners to be filled with the Holy Spirit in order to overcome all sin. Victory over sin would belong to all those who did business with the Holy Spirit.
What are we to think of this promise in light of Swaggart's own dark side? It's no wonder that some people relished the chance to defrock Swaggart in public. The mighty had fallen indeed. Hopefully he learned something from his trials. A hint of wisdom is evident in some of the things he says. For example, he said reflecting on his experiences: "I have seen that the gospel is perfect but its messengers are not." Jimmy Swaggart could now identify with Peter, who began his ministry with these words: "Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord." Ministry always begins in confession!"
20. Breaking the Rules
Illustration
Charles Swindoll
Charles Swindoll, in his book "The Grace Awakening," tells about one of his youth workers many years ago who was a member of an ethnic church. It was Scandinavian. Being a rather forward-looking and creative young man, he decided he would show the youth group a missionary film. We're talking about a simple, safe, black-and-white religious-oriented movie documentary. That film projector hadn't been off an hour before a group of the leaders in the church called him in and asked him about what he had done. They asked, "Did you show the young people a film?" In all honesty he responded, "Well, yeah, I did." "We don't like that," they replied. Without trying to be argumentative, the youth worker reasoned, "Well, I remember that at the last missionary conference, our church showed slides "
One of the church officers put his hand up signaling him to cease talking. Then, in these words, he emphatically explained the conflict: "If it's still, fine. If it moves, sin!" You can show slides, but when they start movin', you're gettin' into sin.
At first glance verse 41 seems cursory, "Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man." Why does mark mention this touch? Does he want to point out that Jesus took the risk of getting Leprosy? Does he want us to understand the depth of Christ's compassion that he would touch a leper? Is he simply trying to describe the moment? Unfortunately these are not the reasons that Mark carefully describes the touch. It is this TOUCH that gets Jesus into trouble with the religious leaders. It is this direct contact with a leper that banishes Jesus from Galilee. Mark's point is that Jesus broke the Mosaic law when he reached out and touched the man. In Leviticus the law states that a person is unclean if he has an infectious disease such as sores on the skin, and anyone who touches him becomes unclean and has sinned.
Doesn't this sound like our legalistic attitude today? If you heal a leper, fine. If you touch him, sin! You can heal all you want, but when you start touching lepers, your breaking the law and gettin' into sin. Because Jesus touched the leper he was regarded as unclean and a sinner.
Not only was the leper banished from the community but Jesus also because he chose compassion over ceremonial law they drove him out of the town because he chose to touch a man who was "unclean." Describe the sick and hurting as ceremonially unclean and you do not have to deal with them.
21. The Weeds within Us
Illustration
Hubert Beck
C. S. Lewis notes that he once had considerable difficulty in the saying that one should "hate the sin but love the sinner." It didn't seem to make sense to him until one day it occurred to him that it was within himself that the saying showed its most certain truth. Did he not "love himself" while at the same time he "hated the sin" that so dominated his life? Is this not a reflection of the words of Paul we heard only recently when he speaks of the great distress created within himself when he did the things he did not really want to do while not doing the things he very much wanted to do?
St. Theresa of Avila prayed, "Oh, God, I don't love you. I don't even want to love you, but I want to want to love you." Do you not recognize yourself in reflections like these?
The great physicist Werner Heisenberg said, "Man can do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wants to will." He spoke for all humankind, did he not? Is it not fearful to recognize that the weeds in our own lives threaten to suffocate the wheat of God's grace planted within us?
22. A Powerful Prayer
Illustration
Brett Blair
Pastor Joe Wright of Kansas was asked to lead the Kansas State Senate in prayer. They were expecting the usual formal prayer to open the session but that is not what happened. The pastor used the moment as a confessional and prophetic opportunity. As he prayed there were some senators who got up and walked out. When Paul Harvey (a national known radio news and editorialist) got a hold of the prayer and read it on his program he got more requests for copies of it than any other thing he had ever done.
Here's what Rev. Wright the prayed:
"Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask Your forgiveness and to seek Your direction and guidance.
We know Your Word says, "Woe to those who call evil good," but that's exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and inverted our values. We confess that:
- We have ridiculed the absolute truth of Your Word and called it pluralism.
- We have worshipped other gods and called it multi-culturalism.
- We have endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle.
- We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery.
- We have neglected the needy and called it self-preservation.
- We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare.
- We have killed our unborn and called it a choice.
- We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable.
- We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self-esteem.
- We have abused power and called it political savvy.
- We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it ambition.
- We have polluted the airwaves with profanity and called it freedom of expression.
- We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment.
Search us, O God, and know our hearts today; try us and see if there be some wicked way in us; cleanse us from every sin and set us free. Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent here by the people of Kansas, and who have been ordained by You, to govern this great state. Grant them Your wisdom to rule and may their decisions direct us to the center of Your will....Amen."
23. Battle Hymn of the Reformation
Illustration
Brett Blair
Martin Luther, believed in demons but he believed in God more. In that great Hymn "A Mighty Fortress Is Our God" he writes:
And though this world, with devils filled,
should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God hath willed
His truth to triumph through us:
The Prince of Darkness grim,
we tremble not for him;
His rage we can endure, for lo, his doom is sure,
One little word shall fell him.
That hymn, first published in 1529, has been called "the greatest hymn of the greatest man of the greatest period of German history." It has also been dubbed the "Battle Hymn of the Reformation" and with good reason. The Reformation touched off one of the most influential movements in world history. But before this famous Battle Hymn could be written Luther had to battle his personal demons and exorcize them from his own life. Luther felt utterly worthless and incapable of carrying the burdens of priesthood. On occasion Luther even flogged himself in an attempt to keep himself from sin.
He was often, he felt, pursued and tormented by Satan and his cohorts. Until one day, while reading Paul's letter to the Romans, he suddenly understood the meaning of God's grace and how it is appropriated by faith. In that moment he came to understand that he was justified before God through faith and not by his works.
You might say that after this experience Luther was no longer possessed by his demons, he was sitting upright, dressed, and in his right mind.
24. Phantom Pain
Illustration
Dr. Paul Brand
Amputees often experience some sensation of a phantom limb. Somewhere, locked in their brains, a memory lingers of the nonexistent hand or leg. Invisible toes curl, imaginary hands grasp things, a "leg" feels so sturdy a patient may try to stand on it. For a few, the experience includes pain. Doctors watch helplessly, for the part of the body screaming for attention does not exist. One such patient was a medical school administrator, Mr. Barwick, who had a serious and painful circulation problem in his leg but refused to allow the recommended amputation.
As the pain grew worse, Barwick grew bitter. "I hate it!" he would mutter about the leg. At last he relented and told the doctor, "I can't stand it anymore. I'm through with that leg. Take it off." Surgery was scheduled immediately. Before the operation, however, Barwick, asked the doctor. "What do you do with legs after they're removed?"
"We may take a biopsy or explore them a bit, but afterwards we incinerate them," the doctor replied.
Barwick proceeded with a bizarre request: "I would like you to preserve my leg in a pickling jar. I will install it on my mantle shelf. Then, as I sit in my armchair, I will taunt that leg, 'Hah! You can't hurt me anymore!" Ultimately, he got his wish. But the despised leg had the last laugh. Barwick suffered phantom limb pain of the worst degree. The wound healed, but he could feel the torturous pressure of the swelling as the muscles cramped, and he had no prospect of relief. He had hated the leg with such intensity that the pain had unaccountably lodged permanently in his brain.
Phantom limb pain provides wonderful insight into the phenomenon of false guilt. Christians can be obsessed by the memory of some sin committed years ago. It never leaves them, crippling their ministry, their devotional life, their relationships with others. They live in fear that someone will discover their past. They work overtime trying to prove to God they're repentant. They erect barriers against the enveloping, loving grace of God. Unless they experience the truth in I John 3:19-20 that "God is greater than our conscience," they become as pitiful as poor Mr. Barwick, shaking his fist in fury at the pickled leg on the mantle.
25. Giving Up Our Monkeys
Illustration
Several years ago the news media reported on a man who was, for a prolonged period of time, marooned alone on a small Pacific island. A passing ship was prepared to rescue him, but he refused to go. It seems that while there he had acquired a pet monkey which he was unwilling to leave behind, and the ship's regulations would not permit it on board.
Here in church today we meet Christ, our rescuer, our deliverer. He says, "Come, go with me." He comes to set us free - and he will, if we are willing to give up our pet monkeys. He will release us from whatever islands we have been marooned upon, if we are willing to leave behind the things we cannot take with us.
So, let's turn loose our monkeys. In the words of Hebrews 12:1, "Let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which clings so closely ..." Let us part ways with whatever keeps us from going His way, and from here today let us go with him who says, "Come follow me."
26. The Lottery Substitute
Illustration
During the war between Britain and France, men were conscripted into the French army by a kind of lottery system. When someone's name was drawn, he had to go off to battle. There was one exception to this, however. A person could be exempt if another was willing to take his place. On one occasion the authorities came to a certain man and told him he was among those who had been chosen. He refused to go, saying, "I was shot 2 years ago." At first they questioned his sanity, but he insisted that this indeed was the case. He claimed that the military records would show that he had been conscripted 2 years previously and that he had been killed in action. "How can that be?" they questioned. "You are alive now!" He explained that when his name came up, a close friend said to him, "You have a large family, but I am not married and nobody is dependent upon me. I'll take your name and address and go in your place." And that is indeed what the record showed. This rather unusual case was referred to Napoleon Bonaparte, who decided that the country had no legal claim on that man. He was free. He had died in the person of another!
This principle of substitution is also at the heart of the gospel. The Savior willingly took our place, not because He had any less to lose than we, but because of His infinite love. He died in our stead and paid the penalty for our sin. The law, which demands the ultimate punishment, has no claim on us, for we died 1900 years ago in the person of Christ. His finished work is the basis of our salvation. We depend on Him our Substitute!
27. The Reality of the Resurrection - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
100 years ago few people thought it possible that man could fly. No one except the two sons of Rev. Milton Wright who at 10:35 on the morning of Dec. 17 1903 made their first successful flight of 175 feet in a airplane driven by a four cylinder combustion engine. Today we fly much more sophisticated crafts around the moons of Jupiter. It was very hard to believe 100 years ago today but the evidence of that first flight is all around us today.
200 years ago the borders of the United States stretched from the Atlantic to the Mississippi river and none other than Napoleon Bonaparte in France granted her the rights to trade on the Mississippi, and the held the right to impose a duty on every ship that sailed out of the mouth of the Mississippi in New Orleans. What made matters worse is that it looked like Napoleon was going to close the rights to the Mississippi to the Americans entirely. There was no way to expect Napoleon to give up this kind of control. But a U.S. ambassador to France, Robert R. Livingston, concocted a plan to trump Napoleon, and he played that trump with a flourish. He made it known in the right circles that the United States was considering settling its difference with Great Britain and reconciling with her politically. This Napoleon did not want. He was already close to war with England. So when James Monroe, who would later become president, along with Livingston, approached Napoleon?s men with the idea of a land treaty, they agreed. And on May 2, 1803 the Louisiana Purchase was made for three cents an acre. The humor in it all is this: Livingston and Monroe were never commissioned to make such a purpose. But now standing on the eastern banks of the Mississippi River 200 years ago it was hard to believe that the US would ever have the rights to that 828,000 square mile area. But it doubled the size of the United States and the evidence of that great purchase is all around us today.
300 years ago on June 17, 1703 a young boy named John was born to Rev. Samuel and Suzanna Wesley in Epworth England. It was perhaps no surprise that John grew up to become a priest himself. What was a surprise is the kind of ministry he implemented. He formed a small religious study group, which put special emphasis on methodical study and devotion. They had communion often, fasted twice a week, and as they grew they added other things: social services, visiting prisoners, care for the poor, and they even ran a school. Onlookers called them Methodist and it wasn't a polite term, it was said to mock them. When John left the group, it disintegrated. But the name stuck and the evidence of that early movement is all around us today. In almost every town in this country there is a Methodist Church.
There are events in life that amaze us, fill us with joy, and make us wonder whether it really is possible. It is hard to believe, even standing on this side of history, that some of these things were ever accomplished. They are impossible stories that positively happened.
2000 years ago 11 men gathered to discuss in private their next move. They were frightened and confused. Life seemed to be closing in on them and it was not possible for them to continue their three-year-old ministry. Here were the facts: They were betrayed by one of their own. The crowds had turned on them. Their leader had been executed. They had denied their relationship to their leader. And any further development of their leader's ideas would almost certainly mean their own deaths. Into this hopeless scene walks a man they never expected to see. They were so startled by this event that, to a man, they feared they were seeing a ghost. The resurrection amazed them, filled them with joy, and turned their lives around. It's an impossible story that positively happened and the evidence of the resurrection is all around us today.
What amazes you about the resurrection of Jesus? What impossible aspects of it fill you with joy? Let me share a couple of things that are amazing to me.
1. First, the reality of the resurrection amazes me (36-43).
2. Second, the scope of our mission amazes me (44-49).
28. America: Fight For Your Country
Illustration
William J. Bennett
This is a snapshot and abbreviation of William J. Bennett's assessment of American culture in the 90's, looking back through the 20th century. Compare this "voice in the wilderness" to today's issues:
Last year I compiled the Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, a statistical portrait of American behavioral trends of the past three decades. Among the findings: Since 1960, while the gross domestic product has nearly tripled, violent crime has increased at least 560%. Divorces have more than doubled. The percentage of children in single-parent homes had tripled. And by the end of the decade 40% of all American births and 80% of minority births will occur out of wedlock. These are not good things to get used to.
In 1940 teachers identified the top problems in America's schools as: Talking out of turn, chewing gum, making noise and running in the hall. In 1990, teachers listed drugs, alcohol, pregnancy, suicide, rape and assault. These are not good things to get used to, either.
There is a coarseness, a callousness and a cynicism to our era. The worst of it has to do with our children. Our culture seems almost dedicated to the corruption of the young. We have become inured to the cultural rot that is setting in. People are losing their capacity for shock, disgust and outrage...
The ancients called our problem acedia, an aversion to spiritual things and an undue concern for the external and the worldly. Acedia also is the seventh capital sin sloth but it does not mean mere laziness. The slothful heart is stepped in the worldly and carnal, hates the spiritual and wants to be free of its demands.
When the novelist Walker Percy was asked what concerned him most about America's future, he answered, "Probably the fear of seeing America, with all its great strength and beauty and freedom...gradually subside into decay through default and be defeated, not by the communist movement, but from within, from weariness, boredom, cynicism, greed and in the end helplessness before its great problems."
I realize this is a tough indictment. If my diagnosis is wrong, then why, amid our economic prosperity and military security, do almost 70% of the public say we are off track? I submit that only when we turn to the right things enduring, noble, spiritual things will life get better.
Most important, we must return religion to its proper place. Religion provides us with moral bearings, and the solution to our chief problem of spiritual impoverishment depends on spiritual renewal. The surrendering of strong beliefs, in our private and public lives, has demoralized society.
Today, much of society ridicules and mocks those who are serious about their faith. America's only respectable form of bigotry is bigotry against religious people. And the only reason for hatred of religion is that it forces us to confront matters many would prefer to ignore.
Today we must carry on a new struggle for the country we love. We must push hard against an age that is pushing hard against us. If we have full employment and greater economic growth if we have cities of gold and alabaster but our children have not learned how to walk in goodness, justice and mercy, then the American experiment, no matter how gilded, will have failed.
Do not surrender. Get mad. Get in the fight.
Note: from "Excerpts from What Really Ails America," condensed from a speech by William J. Bennett, delivered December 7, 1993 at the Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C., reprinted in Reader's Digest, April, 1994.
29. The Mediator
Illustration
Jonathan Edwards
The redeemed are dependent on God for all. All that we have wisdom, the pardon of sin, deliverance, acceptance in God's favor, grace, holiness, true comfort and happiness, eternal life and glory we have from God by a Mediator; and this Mediator is God. God not only gives us the Mediator, and accepts His mediation, and of His power and grace bestows the things purchased by the Mediator, but He is the Mediator. Our blessings are what we have by purchase; and the purchase is made of God; the blessings are purchased of Him; and not only so, but God is the purchaser. Yes, God is both the purchaser and the price; for Christ, who is God, purchased these blessings by offering Himself as the price of our salvation.
30. Turning Point
Illustration
John R. Steward
When I was in college my professor and good friend Dr. James Kallas would speak of the resurrection of Christ as being similar to the turning point in a war. He would use the Battle of the Bulge in World War II as an example. In recent years you could point to the Gulf War against Iraq. I remember how so many people predicted that this would be a very bloody war. They would point out how large Iraq's army was and that we should be prepared for many casualties coming home injured or in body bags. People were genuinely concerned and it was somewhat uncertain just how things would work out. Then the war began with the fighter jets bombing Iraq. In only two or three days, the Americans had obtained air superiority. When air superiority was achieved, there was no longer any doubt as to who the victor would be in that war. However, it was not at that moment when the war was over or when the killing would stop. It was the turning point in the war when we knew for certain who the victor would be in the end.
That is how it is with the resurrection of Jesus Christ. His resurrection is the turning point in the battle with "sin, death, and the power of the devil." We now know that, in the end, the ultimate victory is ours because of the resurrection of Jesus. "
31. The Burden Bearing Christ - Sermon Starter
Illustration
Brett Blair
There is a wonderful legend concerning the quiet years of Jesus, the years prior to his visible ministry. The legend claims that Jesus the carpenter was one of the master yoke-makers in the Nazareth area. People came from miles around for a yoke, hand carved and crafted by Jesus son of Joseph.
When customers arrived with their team of oxen Jesus would spend considerable time measuring the team, their height, the width, the space between them, and the size of their shoulders. Within a week, the team would be brought back and he would carefully place the newly made yoke over the shoulders, watching for rough places, smoothing out the edges and fitting them perfectly to this particular team of oxen.
That's the yoke Jesus invites us to take. Do not be misled by the word "easy," for its root word in Greek speaks directly of the tailor-made yokes: they were "well-fitting." The yoke Jesus invites us to take, the yoke that brings rest to weary souls, is one that is made exactly to our lives and hearts. The yoke he invites us to wear fits us well, does not rub us nor cause us to develop sore spirits and is designed for two. His yokes were always designed for two. And our yoke-partner is none other than Christ himself.
Running throughout all scripture from the beginning to the end is the theme that ours is a burden bearing Christ. He is not just a Lord whom we burden, and we do, but a Lord who actually solicits our burdens. I want to think with you this morning concerning that thought. He who would be effective must first be free from his burdens. And, it is Christ who frees us. Frees us from...
1. The burden of sin
2. The burden of self-righteousness.
3. Our burdens. So we can bear the burden of others.
32. Forgiving As God Forgives
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
Someone once said that the scariest, most sobering word in the entire New Testament is that tiny little word "as." "Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us." That vital connection between God's abiding forgiveness of us and of our in turn forgiving others tells us that we must forgive. This is not some weird demand on God's part, however. This is not some hoop we must jump through to earn our salvation or to perform like some trained dog just because God enjoys watching us do tricks.
No, the reason for the connection between God's forgiving us and our forgiving others is because of the sheer power of God's forgiveness. It is so great that it simply must and will change us. The reason God expects us to forgive as a result of our being forgiven is the same reason you can expect to be wet after diving into Lake Michigan: water is wet and when you immerse yourself in it, you get wet. So also with forgiving grace: grace is magnetic and beautiful. When God immerses you in grace and saves your life eternally by it, you will be dripping with grace yourself. You will be full of grace and truth and so spread it to others.
33. I Planted the Seeds
Illustration
In the movie Shenandoah, James Stewart plays a Virginia farmer during the Civil War years. He begins every meal with the same prayer: "Lord, I planted the seeds, I plowed the ground, I gathered in the harvest. If I hadn't of put the food on the table it wouldn't be here. But we thank you anyway." We had all better understand the role of grace and mystery in life or we too might fall pray to the sin of thinking too highly of ourselves.
34. The Eighty-Yard Run
Illustration
James Garrett
Irwin Shaw wrote a short story called The Eighty-Yard Run. As a college freshman, at his first football practice, he broke loose for an 80-yard touchdown run. His teammates looked at him with awe. His coach said, "You're going to have quite a future around here." His girlfriend awarded him with a kiss after the practice. Irwin Shaw has the feeling that life is completely satisfying and rewarding.
But nothing in the rest of his life ever lives up to that day again. His football experience is equally disappointing. His marriage sours. The pain of failure is even greater because he remembers thinking on a perfect day many years before that life would always be that pleasant, satisfying and rewarding.
Life does not stand still. There isn't a once-for-all experience. It was Winston Churchill who said, "Success is never final. Failure is never fatal. It is courage that counts."
There are going to be bad days. Sometimes we are going to fall on our respective faces. These failures don't have to be endings. They can be the avenues to experience God's grace more widely and more deeply.
Jesus of Nazareth gets into the boat with the three defeated men. He sat down and taught the people from the boat. When he had ceased teaching, he said to Simon, "Put out into the deep and let down your nets for a catch." Put out into the deep our lives are often fenced in by low expectations. The worst sin is to aim too low.
35. When Perceptions Shift
Illustration
Scott Hoezee
In Mark 3, those who try to turn the work of God into the work of the devil show by so doing that they are so far gone, so deeply enmeshed in a spiritually inverted reality, that there is no reaching them. Some of you will recall the dwarves as depicted by C.S. Lewis in the last book of the Narnia series. The dwarves had been brought by Aslan the Lion into the glories of the New Narnia, which stood for heaven or the kingdom of God. These stubborn dwarves sat smack in the middle of a sunlit meadow full of wildflowers and were being fed fruit and vegetables more exquisitely flavorful and fresh than anyone had ever before imagined was possible.
Yet their minds were darkened, their hearts were cold. And so they were convinced they were sitting in the middle of a stinky old stable being fed moldy bread and cow manure. When one of the other characters asks Aslan what can be done for these hapless figures, the answer comes back that nothing can be done. When black becomes white and white becomes black, when evil is good and good is evil, people are gone. God can't get through to them. The reason the unpardonable sin can never be forgiven is because it will never, ever be recognized as a sin. Even if God came to such people bearing the sweet fragrance of his grace, all these people would smell would be the stink of a rotting corpse. They won't be forgiven because they cannot be forgiven and they cannot be forgiven because they have come to believe that the gospel's elixir of life is strychnine: pure poison.
36. With a Repentant Heart
Illustration
Charles W. Colson,
Believers dare not come to the Lord's Table except with a repentant heart. "Whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner," as Paul puts it, "drinks judgment to himself." That should be a sobering warning, especially when the apostle adds that because of this offense many have fallen ill or died. Any pastor who takes the Word of God seriously should never administer Communion without adequately warning partakers. Those who are unrepentant should flee the table rather than trivialize the sacred.
And God does not view this sacred act lightly. Pat Novak, pastor in a nonsacramental denomination, discovered this when he was serving as a hospital chaplain intern just outside of Boston several years ago. Pat was making his rounds one summer morning when he was called to visit a patient admitted with an undiagnosed ailment. John, a man in his sixties, had not responded to any treatment; medical tests showed nothing; psychological tests were inconclusive. Yet he was wasting away; he had not even been able to swallow for two weeks. The nurses tried everything. Finally they called the chaplain's office.
When Pat walked into the room, John was sitting limply in his bed, strung with IV tubes, staring listlessly at the wall. He was a tall, grandfatherly man, balding a little, but his sallow skin hung loosely on his face, neck, and arms where the weight had dropped from his frame. His eyes were hollow.
Pat was terrified; he had no idea what to do. But John seemed to brighten a bit as soon as he saw Pat's chaplain badge and invited him to sit down. As they talked, Pat sensed that God was urging him to do something specific: He knew he was to ask John if he wanted to take Communion. Chaplain interns were not encouraged to ask this type of thing in this public hospital, but Pat did.
At that John broke down. "I can't!" he cried. "I've sinned and can't be forgiven."
Pat paused a moment, knowing he was about to break policy again. Then he told John about 1 Corinthians 11 and Paul's admonition that whoever takes Communion in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself. And he asked John if he wanted to confess his sin. John nodded gratefully. To this day Pat can't remember the particular sin John confessed, nor would he say if he did, but he recalls that it did not strike him as particularly egregious. Yet it had been draining the life from this man. John wept as he confessed, and Pat laid hands on him, hugged him, and told John his sins were forgiven.
Then Pat got the second urging from the Holy Spirit: Ask him if he wants to take Communion. He did. Pat gave John a Bible and told him he would be back later. Already John was sitting up straighter, with a flicker of light in his eyes.
Pat visited a few more patients and then ate some lunch in the hospital cafeteria. When he left he wrapped an extra piece of bread in a napkin and borrowed a coffee cup from the cafeteria. He ran out to a shop a few blocks away and bought a container of grape juice. Then he returned to John's room with the elements and celebrated Communion with him, again reciting 1 Corinthians 11. John took the bread and chewed it slowly. It was the first time in weeks he had been able to take solid food in his mouth. He took the cup and swallowed. He had been set free.
Within three days John walked out of that hospital. The nurses were so amazed they called the newspaper, which later featured the story of John and Pat, appropriately, in its "LIFE" section.
37. No Celebration without Confession
Illustration
Brett Blair
Another set of "money-changers" in the church seem to have lost their reason for forgiveness. Catholic priests have expressed concern over the sharp decline in the number of people desiring to take confession. We hear a lot of talk about the word celebration in our church today. There can be no celebration until there is first confession. In the parable of the prodigal son, the banquet does not occur until the boy had first come to himself.
A Sunday School class in a church once made an unusual request one day. They requested that the prayer of confession be taken out of the order of worship. They gave the following reasons:
- Confessions imply that we are bad people.
- Our children will get a negative image of themselves.
- Guilt is damaging; we need to think positively.
- Worship should always be uplifting and make us feel good.
This sounds like the philosophy advocated by that book some years ago "I'm OK you're OK." Tell me then. If I'm OK and you're OK then what are we doing here? The refusal to acknowledge that we are sinful people is damaging the church today, and it is damage that is coming from within, not from without. We have bought in to the modern culture that we should have a positive self-image through positive thinking. Friends, sin is real, and it is too destructive to ignore. The cross reminds us just how serious our sin is. The failure to express our sin before God and one another devalues God's redemptive grace. It is not positive thinking that will remove our guilt; it is God's redemptive action.
38. The Easter Formula
Illustration
Billy D. Strayhorn
In April 2002, the well-respected Oxford University philosophy professor Richard Swineburne defended the truth of the Resurrection at a high-profile gathering of philosophy professors at Yale University. Swineburne used Bayes Theorem, a broadly accepted mathematical probability theory and tool to defend the truth of Christ's resurrection.
In a New York Times interview, Swineburne said, "For someone dead for 36 hours to come to life again is, according to the laws of nature, extremely improbable. But if there is a God of the traditional kind, natural laws only operate because he makes them operate." Swineburne used the Bayes Theorem to assign values to things like the probability that God is real, Jesus' behavior during his lifetime, and the quality of witness testimony after his death. Then he plugged the numbers into a probability formula and added everything up.
The results? There's a 97 percent probability that the resurrection really happened.
That's nice to know. It's one more tool in the tool kit of ministry. But the truth is that you and I don't really need that. The church doesn't really need that information. Because we have our own formula.
It's the Easter Formula: R+ET+F=LE. The Resurrection plus the Empty Tomb plus Faith equal Life Eternal. That's the Easter Formula.
39. God the Diver
Illustration
Raymond Cannata
C.S. Lewis has this really helpful illustration. He says that in the incarnation, Jesus was like a diver. He is God in heaven looking down into this dark, slimy, murky water. That's our sinful, polluted world. God dives in, He gets himself wet. And then God came up again, dripping, but holding the precious thing he went down to recover. That precious thing was Zacchaeus, and you and me. All those sinners who have trusted in Christ. That's how we get out of the slime of tax collecting, or cheating, or lusting, or hating, or whatever other self-destructive sin we are buried in. God in Christ descended down into the slime and rescued us. Resolutions and vows to be better won't help by themselves. We don't have the power to keep them. We are stuck on the sea bottom. We have no power of our own to get up or out. All we can do is cry out for God's grace to lift us up, to rescue us.
40. Immortality: Quality vs. Quantity
Illustration
Gary R. Habermas & J.P. Moreland
While none of the actual terms for immortality are found in the gospel teachings of Jesus, he addresses the subject in passages such as Luke 20:27-40 and John 11:25-26. Strawson claims that, for Jesus and his Jewish contemporaries, immortality was synonymous with resurrection (Jesus and the Future Life, p. 209). Murray Harris holds that, while the two terms are distinct, they are also inseparable, for the resurrection inevitably involves the acquiring of immortality. They are interdependent sides of the same truth. See his volume, Raised Immortal: Resurrection and Immortality in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983), pp. 199-201, 209-214, 232-236, for a stimulating and detailed study of this subject.
We also want to be clear that the term immortality is not to be confused with notions such as the Greek concept of immortality of the soul. Actually, three Greek synonyms (athanasia, aphtharsia, aphtartos) are used only eleven times in the New Testament (ten by Paul and one by Peter) to refer to the believer's life after death. In no case are these terms applied directly to the human soul. In fact, the Greek teaching had very little influence in Palestine anyway. For several reasons why Paul, in particular, opposed this Greek belief, see the next section of this chapter. Further, Paul specifically used immortality and eternal life in a related manner in Rom. 2:7 (cf. Gal. 6:8; 2 Tim. 1:10), while interchanging his references to immortality and the resurrection of the body in 1 Cor. 15:50-55. He thereby asserts that the term eternal life in the New Testament "refers primarily to quality ... secondarily to quantity ... Immortality, on the other hand, refers primarily to quantity ... and secondarily to quality" (see p. 199; cf. pp. 273-275).
41. THE CROSS
Illustration
John H. Krahn
The cross best proclaims the indisputable fact that we worship a caring God. It is the most popular of all Christian symbols. There is no Christianity without the cross.
The cross shouts God’s words of love to each of us. It is his proclamation of possibility beyond the present. In it is hope for the hopeless, love for the loveless, encouragement for the depressed, and the pronouncement of life beyond death for those who grieve the loss of a friend or contemplate their own demise. Its importance to our faith cannot be over-emphasized, its proclamation must never be subdued. It trumpets, "God cares!" That’s music to our ears - the best news we could ever hear.
As I look at the cross, I cannot help but think of a movie I saw years ago. Few movies in my life have had the impact of Ben Hur. Many scenes made an indelible impression - the great sea battle, the exciting chariot race, the repugnant leprosy colony. Yet, none hit harder than the crucifixion of our Lord. The sound of hammer on nail rings through the air, the cross rises until it suddenly thumps into place. Slowly Jesus’ blood begins to flow - one drop, then another ... a puddle forms beneath the cross. It begins to rain. Water mixes with more blood, and together they begin to trickle down the hillside. The trickle becomes a stream as the blood washes over God’s creation. We are reminded that the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin.
At Calvary God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. The blood of Christ pouring down the cross restored our relationship with the Father. We cannot fully understand the mystery of God’s plan to recapture a creation gone astray. We only know that all who come to the cross in simple, trusting faith are cleansed by his blood and find peace with the Father.
By his death Jesus has unchained us. Unchained - there is no better word for it. He has set us free from the wages of our sins that only pay dividends in hell and has set us on the positive pathway of a life with God. Our eyes need no longer be downcast; our head has no reason to be between our knees. We are no longer oppressed with our weighty sins, for we have been touched by none other than God. He has cared not just a little but powerfully. His power encountered our sin, and it was no more. His incredible desire to rescue us in spite of everything dispels even the worst sin. But we must be wise enough to permit ourselves and our sins to be encountered by that desire.
42. Delivery Confirmation
Illustration
Staff
George Sweeting, in his book "The No-Guilt Guide for Witnessing," tells of a man by the name of John Currier who in 1949 was found guilty of murder and sentenced to life in prison. Later he was transferred and paroled to work on a farm near Nashville, Tennessee.
In 1968, Currier's sentence was terminated, and a letter bearing the good news was sent to him. But John never saw the letter, nor was he told anything about it. Life on that farm was hard and without promise for the future. Yet John kept doing what he was told even after the farmer for whom he worked had died.
Ten years went by. Then a state parole officer learned about Currier's plight, found him, and told him that his sentence had been terminated. He was a free man.
Sweeting concluded that story by asking, "Would it matter to you if someone sent you an important message, the most important in your life, and year after year, the urgent message was never delivered?"
We who have heard the good news and experienced freedom through Christ are responsible to proclaim it to others still enslaved by sin. Are we doing all we can to make sure that people get the message?
43. Temptations of Daily People
Illustration
Douglas R. A. Hare
This passage (4:1—11) is often appointed by lectionaries for the first Sunday of Lent. The presumption is that the narrative is of direct relevance for Christians as they enter a period of penitence. Ordinary Christians are unlikely to perceive it so, and with good cause. The story does not correspond with our experience; we do not hold conversations with a visible devil, nor are we whisked from place to place as Jesus is in the story. Moreover, the temptations that Jesus faces are peculiar to him; they seem very remote from those we face day by day. This passage may in fact prompt some to doubt the validity of Hebrews 4:15: "For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin." What did Jesus know of the temptations that are faced daily by the recovering alcoholic and substance abuser? the lonely divorcee? the struggling business owner? the teenager who covets peer acceptance above all?
There is, however, a common denominator that links all of these with the temptation as ascribed to Jesus. The basic, underlying temptation that Jesus shared with us is the temptation to treat God as less than God. We may not be tempted to turn stones into bread (we are more apt to turn butter into guns, but we are constantly tempted to mistrust God's readiness to empower us to face our trials. None of us is likely to put God to the test by leaping from a cliff, but we are frequently tempted to question God's helpfulness when things go awry; we forget the sure promise, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness" (II Corinthians 12:9). Pagan idolatry is no more a temptation for us than it was for Jesus, but compromise with the ways of the world is a continuing seduction. It is indeed difficult for us to worship and serve God only. We should be continually grateful that we have a great high priest who, tempted as we are, was able to resist all such temptations by laying hold of Scripture and firmly acknowledging that only God is God.
44. Profit From Rebuke
Illustration
Staff
Criticism is always difficult to accept, but if we receive it with humility and a desire to improve our character it can be very helpful. Only a fool does not profit when he is rebuked for his mistakes. When we are criticized we ought to ask ourselves whether the criticism contains any truth. If it does, we should learn from it, even when it is not given with the right motivation and in the right spirit. Here arefour suggestions to create a healthy response to criticism:
- Commit the matter instantly to God, asking Him to remove all resentment or counter-criticism on your part and teach you the needed lessons.
- Remember that we are all great sinners and that the one who has criticized us does not begin to know the worst about us.
- If you have made a mistake or committed a sin, humbly and frankly confess it to God and to anyone you may have injured.
- Be willing to learn afresh that you are not infallible and that you need God's grace and wisdom every moment of the day to keep on the straight path.
When we are criticized, let's accept what is true and act upon it, thereby becoming a stronger person. He who profits from rebuke is wise.
45. Plucked From The Burning
Illustration
Michael P. Green
An old Indian, after living many years in sin, was led to Christ by a missionary. Friends asked him to explain the change in his life. Reaching down, he picked up a little worm and placed it on a pile of leaves. Then, touching a match to the leaves, he watched them smolder and burst into flames. As the flames worked their way up to the center where the worm lay, the old chief suddenly plunged his hand into the center of the burning pile and snatched out the worm. Holding the worm gently in his hand, he gave this testimony to the grace of God: “Me … that worm!”
46. If We Miss a Deadline
Illustration
King Duncan
A tough, old cowhand sauntered into a saloon and began drinking whiskey by the bottle. The more he drank, the more unruly he became, shooting holes in the ceiling and floor. Everybody was afraid to take on the old cowhand. Finally, a short, mild-mannered storekeeper walked up to the unruly cowhand and said, "I'll give you five minutes to get out of town." The old cowhand holstered his gun, pushed the whiskey bottle away, briskly walked out, got on his horse, and rode out of town. When he left, someone asked the storekeeper what he would have done if the unruly cowhand had refused to go. "I'd have extended the deadline," he said.
Many Christians have that concept of God: if we miss a deadline, God will simply extend it. They do not take the judgment of God seriously. "I sin, God forgives," is their attitude. They wallow in what Dietrich Bonhoeffer calls "cheap grace." Grace is not cheap. Grace can be understood only as it stands in relief of God's judgment. God examines us and finds us unfit, unprepared for the wedding feast. But by faith in Jesus Christ - Christ, who gave himself for the expiation of our sins - we are made recipients of God's unconditional acceptance of us as worthy, fully dressed. But that grace has been dearly purchased. Our sins are serious business. It is only because of God's great love for us that God forgives us of our sins and dresses us in new, more appropriate clothes.
47. How Can God Know All About Us?
Illustration
Unknown
A man named Gerhard Dirks, the "father of the modern computer," was one who had to face up to life's most important question. During the years of the Second World War he made many inventions that led to the development of the first computers. He and his family escaped from Hitler's Germany and later Russian occupation to the west. He was a brilliant man, reported to have an IQ of 208. He had over 140 patents with IBM and even attempted theoretically to reconstruct the human brain. But he became completely bewildered and shaken when confronted with the complexity and utter impossibility of such a reconstruction. He didn't know what to do or where to run. He had to face a choice: Either the human brain came about by a fantastic chance or by intelligent planning. Dirks re-established contact with an old friend and found out this friend had become a Christian. He saw the change in this man from being selfish and impatient to being patient and at peace. But, Dirks clung to his atheism because he could not understand how God can know all about us, every person in the entire world. He couldn't understand where God could possibly store all the information about every person that ever lived.
Dirks went with his friend to a discussion group where a man talked about God. Someone asked "What do you say to someone who thinks they are not a sinner?" The leader of the meeting told the man to take four pieces of paper and number them 1 to 4 and write a list of things on each piece of paper. On page 1, he said: write down every time you can remember when you said "yes" and meant "no" or said "no" and meant "yes." Then write down every time you can remember when you told an outright lie. Write down every time you gave someone a shady answer, every time you made a promise and broke it and every time you made a promise and never intended to keep it.
On page 2 write what it is that you hide from everybody. You don't have to show this to anyone, but to yourself. And, write down something that, if anyone found out about it, something inside you would wither.
On page 3 he said make a list of friends to whom you have done something that you would not want them to do to you. Never mind if they did something to provoke you, just put down your part.
On page 4 write the names of the people for whom you have done something good, and done it without hope of any compensation or reward of any kind. He then said "I think that any man who does that honestly will see that he is a sinner and that he is desperately in the need of salvation. He will know that the sin and the wrong he has written down is only the tip of an iceberg."
Dirks went home and did it, and the imbalance between paper 4 and papers 1, 2, and 3 were self-evident. He had to admit he was asinner. And, suddenly it hit him. He knew where God stored data. He got his answer without even looking for it. God stored the information about Dirks IN DIRKS. Everything he had ever thought, seen, heard, said, done - everything was there in his own mind. He was his own "file." Every human being was his own "file." Now, he lost all his excuses for not believing in the Savior. People CAN change, because he saw the real changes in his friend. And, there is information for a final judgment - because every person carries his own data. He realized that he did not like himself and the way he lived. Just like when a computer has errors he needed to be "debugged." He fell onto his knees and prayed "Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me and wash me in your blood."
In a few minutes he stopped crying. He knew that something had happened. A wall had come down, the wall that had stood between him and his Creator. He hadn't known the wall was there, until it came down. It was the wall that Christ had demolished. Now, for the first time in his life, he knew what it meant to have fellowship with his Heavenly Father. Then he thought, it wasn't a wall, it was more like a sphere made of stone - a sphere that formed a prison. It had kept him in, and God out. He was now free of that prison!
48. A Costly Gift
Illustration
King Duncan
A small boy was consistently late coming home from school. His parents warned him one day that he must be home on time that afternoon, but nevertheless, he arrived later than ever. His mother met him at the door and said nothing. His father met him in the living room and said nothing.
At dinner that night, the boy looked at his plate. There was a slice of bread and a glass of water. He looked at his father's full plate and then at his father, but his father remained silent. The boy was crushed. The father waited for the full impact to sink in, then quietly took the boy's plate and placed it in front of himself. He took his own plate of meat and potatoes, put it in front of the boy, and smiled at his son. When that boy grew up, he said, "All my life I've known what God is like by what my father did that night." Our sin is serious business. God's grace is a costly gift.
49. Lick to Death
Illustration
Chris T. Zwingelberg
Radio personality Paul Harvey tells the story of how an Eskimo kills a wolf. The account is grisly, yet it offers fresh insight into the consuming, self-destructive nature of sin.
"First, the Eskimo coats his knife blade with animal blood and allows it to freeze. Then he adds another layer of blood, and another, until the blade is completely concealed by frozen blood.
"Next, the hunter fixes his knife in the ground with the blade up. When a wolf follows his sensitive nose to the source of the scent and discovers the bait, he licks it, tasting the fresh frozen blood. He begins to lick faster, more and more vigorously, lapping the blade until the keen edge is bare. Feverishly now, harder and harder the wolf licks the blade in the arctic night. So great becomes his craving for blood that the wolf does not notice the razor-sharp sting of the naked blade on his own tongue, nor does he recognize the instant at which his insatiable thirst is being satisfied by his OWN warm blood. His carnivorous appetite just craves more until the dawn finds him dead in the snow!"
It is a fearful thing that people can be "consumed by their own lusts." Only God's grace keeps us from the wolf's fate.
50. A Change in Control
Illustration
Richard J. Fairchild
Last night a friend of mine was talking about his father: he spoke of how, for many years, his father binged out, how hisfather was a drunkard - a man who when sober was kind and gentle - and when drunk - well he was something else again. He had no control over himself. And this kind and gentle man brought pain and suffering upon others, or at least the forcewithin him did so - the family had to move - to change homes and communities - almost every year - landlords werecheated, employers disappointed, children neglected, friends abandoned - or embarrassed or betrayed.
And this continued on until one day, after taking his children to Sunday School for a period of time, after witnessing the faith of others and what it did for them, he accepted Jesus into his life. He asked God to take control, to guide his actions and save him from his sins and from the power of sin. And then things changed; debts still had to be paid, amends still had to be made, mistakes still occurred. But the inner man -the man that God made - was set free to grow and mature. No more booze, a lot more prayer. And the love and kindness of the man that could be glimpsed before - in the moments of sobriety - became apparent to all - for days, weeks, and finally years on end. The children who were still living at home stopped fearing what would happen next - they began to look forward to being with their father - they began to develop their own faith in God - a faith that still guides them to this day. This man, this father, this husband, experience a change in control - he went from being in the control of the devil to being in the control of God, and the result was the renewal of his inner nature, and in the end, when his earthly tent was destroyed, the result was a building from God - a house not made with hands - eternal in the heavens.
Showing
1
to
50
of
267
results
- ‘A feat of diplomacy’: Biden hails Russia-US prisoner swap
- Murder of 13-year-old budding preacher ‘never supposed to happen,’ suspect says
- Female Olympic boxer quits, reduced to tears after 46-second fight against male competitor
- Founding elder exits Gateway Church as attendance falls in wake of Robert Morris scandal
- Black preachers condemn Margaret Sanger, Planned Parenthood: 'Nothing is more racist in America'
- Trump pressed on calls for police 'immunity from prosecution' after Sonya Massey killing
- America's youngest Olympic athlete cites Isaiah 40:31 after winning gold medal
- Liberty University faces civil rights lawsuit after firing trans-identified employee
- Drag queens back Kamala days after VP hosts 'Queer Eye,' appears on RuPaul's show
- 'Duck Dynasty' star Willie Robertson on turning darkness into light one conversation at a time
- Choctaw Bibles Connect Christians with Lost Heritage
- An Assassination Attempt in Brazil Brought Politics into Churches
- In Asian American Churches, Generational Differences Deter Young Leaders
- What Wrestling Taught an Olympic Gold Medalist About God
- O Say Can You See God in These 5 National Anthems?
- Nigerian Church Watches, Prays as Ocean Rises
- New Alliance Aims to Unite Chinese Churches Divided by Geopolitics
- Americans Are Still Inviting People to Church
- ERLC Retracts Announcement Firing President Brent Leatherwood
- Homelessness Hits Record High, Straining Rescue Missions
- We Can't Just Ignore The Truth About Jesus Much Longer
- Boys, Boys, Boys - 3 Quarks Daily
- JD Vance Appeared on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show'?
- A secret shame emerges as India grows older: Elders abandoned by their children
- 13-year-old budding preacher who lived for the ‘Glory of God’ killed for camera
- America's youngest Olympic athlete cites Isaiah 40:31 after winning gold medal
- Police, monks gear up for another battle on Mount Athos
- Go Ahead And Vote For Trump, But Do It With Your Eyes Wide Open
- Why Josh Shapiro would help Kamala Harris win over the most voters
- Haniyeh’s Top 5 ‘Moderate’ Moments That the Media Chose to Omit
- Trump's 'Beautiful Christians' are Not Only Ones Whose Values Matter
- Being Good Is as Important as Being Right
- Blasphème & Olympiques
- Drag Queen in Olympic Opening Ceremony has No Regrets
- Is Hindu Nationalism Friendly to Christianity?
- Where Lynchings Still Happen
- Vatican II: For Better or For Worse
- After the Fall: A Christian's Confession of His Role in Afghanistan
- Art Center Founded By Fr. Rupnik Pushes Back on Removal of Artwork
- The Trad Family
