This is a comment I posted on this article on the author's blog. My own article on this subject is here.
It was good of you to began with the much discussed Greek terminology on the silence/quietness of women which, ironically, has not quieted the discussion of this subject. Also, a very good point is that Paul urged and encouraged quieteness and orderliness among men and women when praying or prophesying in the assembly. Lastly, the admonition against the haphazard, weapon-like use of the passage is well stated.
Where I do pause is on the connection you draw between the false teachers in I Timothy 1 to include the women in that false teaching. Hence, the apostle's instruction to the women. I understand your efforts to justify this connection in the opening words of chapter two, “Then I urge you first of all…” and then to support it with the patriarchial culture.
There definitely was false teaching. There was/may have been a patriarchial culture, but this key, I believe, towards understanding Paul's instruction to women and which is evident in several of his letters. I am referring to the prevalent dominance of the female culture of Artemis in the very city where Timothy ministered. It was there that the Holy Spirit enlightened the church to Artemis. What the law of Moses was to Jews in Jerusalem and Judea, Artemis was to the Gentiles in Ephesus and Asia.
Paul had himself received no less a similiar instruction directly by the Holy Spirit as he gave to the women when he was prohibited twice from preaching in Asia. Although we never read that prohibition was removed exited then reentered Asia at Ephesus where he stayed two years. It was as much an evangelism strategy by the Holy Spirit as was his direction through Paul for the women. During a time when there was a bit of false teaching at Ephesus and which could potentially have been as bad or worse than Corinth Paul determined this was NOT THE TIME for women, in the female-culture city of Ephesus, for our sisters to take on more than the most passive form of learning and teaching. Paul himself, in a physical manner, was prohibited and restrained by the brothers from stepping into the fomenting mob Demetrius had stirred up in Ephesus in Acts 19.
There are many beliefs attributed to Artemis and although there are various forms of those beliefs these three were pretty much universal. They are alluded to in I Timothy and other of Paul's writings in such a manner that those who had come out of the Artemis cult worship would readily recognize: 1) She was BORN FIRST then turned to assist her mother give birth to her twin brother Apollos, 2) She ensured the succession of KINGS, and 3) She was the SAVIOR of WOMEN. Just in I Timothy 1 & 2 these three are not too subtely countered and refuted by Paul's assertions of Jesus as the FIRSTBORN, the KING and the SAVIOR, not of women alone, but all MANKIND.
Friday, February 17, 2012
Saturday, February 4, 2012
The unwearied human body
I confess. Sometimes I grow weary of the endless barrage on the church. This from saints in Christ.
I know a brother who goes on long and tiring about the church's misuse of funds for buildings not authorized by Jesus. Thousand, hundreds of thousand and even millions are spent and still the church cannot meet her budget.
I pointed out the Jews built meeting places. The synagogues were neither authorized nor prohibited under the law of Moses for Israel. Jesus and the apostles taught in those synagogues. It was never a source of contention for them or something about which Jesus castigated the people of God for all their shortcomings, failures and sins.
Clearly, at least it seems to me, the principle of a meeting place for the people of God and the practice of doing so are matters of liberty for the discretion of the saints in Christ. So why does any of this matter?
It matters because as I pointed out to him he has not hit upon some great discovery of the church's sin concerning buildings. Furthermore, I said, imagine the wide open door for smugness and self-righteousness were the church to boast in her self-sufficiency to meet her budget.
As it is the church is as human as you and I and every brother and sister who struggles with finances and various other matters, but who presses on trusting in the Lord to provide for her, not for herself, but for those to whom she ministers.l She is a body. She is human. She, like her Savior, bleeds yet does not grow weary. Blessed and praised be God, her Lord and Savior.
I know a brother who goes on long and tiring about the church's misuse of funds for buildings not authorized by Jesus. Thousand, hundreds of thousand and even millions are spent and still the church cannot meet her budget.
I pointed out the Jews built meeting places. The synagogues were neither authorized nor prohibited under the law of Moses for Israel. Jesus and the apostles taught in those synagogues. It was never a source of contention for them or something about which Jesus castigated the people of God for all their shortcomings, failures and sins.
Clearly, at least it seems to me, the principle of a meeting place for the people of God and the practice of doing so are matters of liberty for the discretion of the saints in Christ. So why does any of this matter?
It matters because as I pointed out to him he has not hit upon some great discovery of the church's sin concerning buildings. Furthermore, I said, imagine the wide open door for smugness and self-righteousness were the church to boast in her self-sufficiency to meet her budget.
As it is the church is as human as you and I and every brother and sister who struggles with finances and various other matters, but who presses on trusting in the Lord to provide for her, not for herself, but for those to whom she ministers.l She is a body. She is human. She, like her Savior, bleeds yet does not grow weary. Blessed and praised be God, her Lord and Savior.
Friday, January 6, 2012
Father, Son, Holy Spirit . . . heart, mind and soul
One of the more common references many of us have heard over the years is this one: God the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The tendency is to speak clearly and openly of the Father as God. The Son and Holy Spirit, well, they have a subset status. We even hear about, "He's the second person . . ." The deity test of our conviction is revealed when we stop short of saying point blank: God died. We say, "the Son of God died." This, of course, is true but it is spoken with a corrupt adaptation of: God is not a man that he should lie. (Numbers 23:19) As you can see the passage says lie, not die.
God did die. He did not remain dead. The Giver of Life has demonstrated his power over death, not merely by raising the dead, but by laying down his own life to take it up again.
God did die. He did not remain dead. The Giver of Life has demonstrated his power over death, not merely by raising the dead, but by laying down his own life to take it up again.
Monday, December 26, 2011
Christmas and holidays
Now that Christmas 2011 has passed and the holiday spirit lingers I think it is as good a time for this brief document.
Christmas, as far as believers in Christ are concerned, is no more a biblical or commanded day to be observed by the saints in Christ. There are two weak and tragic attitudes and views disciples in Christ often take towards observance of holidays.
The first view in favor of observance of holidays is on the basis of the legal recognition of a holiday, such as Christmas, in America. This, plus its cultural relevance, is all the permission some Christians need to observe a holiday. This view is earthly and carnal and hardly reflects the disciples response as beign with the knowledge and understanding of the scriptures.
The second view is the rejection of Christmas as much as Halloween and all holidays as being of pagan origin. Some of the passages cited include Colossians, "Let no one therefore judge you in eating, or in drinking, or with respect to a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath day, 17 which are a shadow of the things to come; but the body is Christ’s." The encouragement by Paul to the Colosse saints was to NOT ALLOW or permit anyone to impose their judgments on the believer. It was NOT a prohibition by Paul to the saints at Colosse not to observe any particular holiday. Elsewhere in Romans 14 Paul's point was to admonish both the brother who judges another just as he himself is judged concerning observance or non-observance of days.
A related element of this view concerns the pagan origin of holidays, such as Christmas, as the reason Christians are not to observe it. This is mistaken.
The truth is Paul was free from the law of Moses. He definitely would never teach the saints to observe a holiday, whether pagan or established by God. Yet, this is precisely what Paul did with Pentecost.
For Paul had determined to sail past Ephesus, that he might not have to spend time in Asia; for he was hastening, if it were possible for him, to be in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 19)
He arrived in Jerusalem (Acts 21) to learn there was a lot of misinformation about his teaching. He accepted the advise of the saints in Jerusalem, went with other men who had a vow into the temple in accordance with the law of Moses and Jewish custom. Incidentally, this did nothing to appease the ignorant, misinformed Jews who still stirred the people to seize Paul.
Is Paul's observance of Pentecost to be taken by the saints in Christ today as an authoritative example to observe Pentecost? After all Pentecost was NOT a pagan holiday. It was established by God.
When the mob seized Paul it provided him the opportunity to proclaim the gospel. (Acts 22) Paul was never at loss as are many saints today to draw a connection between his circumstance and the message of the kingdom. For example he took the inscription, "To the Unknown god" as his perfect cue to preach. Similarly, when the provocation in his spirit could bear it no longer he proclaimed the gospel. (Acts 17:16) Of course, Paul, like Jesus, would never turn down the opportunity or an invitation to preach in synagogue. How many brethren would refuse lest misinformation about them might spread and they fall out of favor with men.
It's time, especially teachers and preachers of the word to the people of God, developed an understanding beyond mere trite, bland responses on observances of holidays. This is equally true of teachers and preachers who rail ignorantly about pagan holidays and do nothing to enlighten the saints nor to proclaim Jesus. This is vital as much for the saints in Christ in Nigeria, Eygpt or America.
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year in 2012 to one and all. Rejoice in the Lord always and again I say, rejoice.
Christmas, as far as believers in Christ are concerned, is no more a biblical or commanded day to be observed by the saints in Christ. There are two weak and tragic attitudes and views disciples in Christ often take towards observance of holidays.
The first view in favor of observance of holidays is on the basis of the legal recognition of a holiday, such as Christmas, in America. This, plus its cultural relevance, is all the permission some Christians need to observe a holiday. This view is earthly and carnal and hardly reflects the disciples response as beign with the knowledge and understanding of the scriptures.
The second view is the rejection of Christmas as much as Halloween and all holidays as being of pagan origin. Some of the passages cited include Colossians, "Let no one therefore judge you in eating, or in drinking, or with respect to a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath day, 17 which are a shadow of the things to come; but the body is Christ’s." The encouragement by Paul to the Colosse saints was to NOT ALLOW or permit anyone to impose their judgments on the believer. It was NOT a prohibition by Paul to the saints at Colosse not to observe any particular holiday. Elsewhere in Romans 14 Paul's point was to admonish both the brother who judges another just as he himself is judged concerning observance or non-observance of days.
A related element of this view concerns the pagan origin of holidays, such as Christmas, as the reason Christians are not to observe it. This is mistaken.
The truth is Paul was free from the law of Moses. He definitely would never teach the saints to observe a holiday, whether pagan or established by God. Yet, this is precisely what Paul did with Pentecost.
For Paul had determined to sail past Ephesus, that he might not have to spend time in Asia; for he was hastening, if it were possible for him, to be in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 19)
He arrived in Jerusalem (Acts 21) to learn there was a lot of misinformation about his teaching. He accepted the advise of the saints in Jerusalem, went with other men who had a vow into the temple in accordance with the law of Moses and Jewish custom. Incidentally, this did nothing to appease the ignorant, misinformed Jews who still stirred the people to seize Paul.
Is Paul's observance of Pentecost to be taken by the saints in Christ today as an authoritative example to observe Pentecost? After all Pentecost was NOT a pagan holiday. It was established by God.
When the mob seized Paul it provided him the opportunity to proclaim the gospel. (Acts 22) Paul was never at loss as are many saints today to draw a connection between his circumstance and the message of the kingdom. For example he took the inscription, "To the Unknown god" as his perfect cue to preach. Similarly, when the provocation in his spirit could bear it no longer he proclaimed the gospel. (Acts 17:16) Of course, Paul, like Jesus, would never turn down the opportunity or an invitation to preach in synagogue. How many brethren would refuse lest misinformation about them might spread and they fall out of favor with men.
It's time, especially teachers and preachers of the word to the people of God, developed an understanding beyond mere trite, bland responses on observances of holidays. This is equally true of teachers and preachers who rail ignorantly about pagan holidays and do nothing to enlighten the saints nor to proclaim Jesus. This is vital as much for the saints in Christ in Nigeria, Eygpt or America.
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year in 2012 to one and all. Rejoice in the Lord always and again I say, rejoice.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Serving Tables
Youth leaving church
I am leery about a study which focuses on concerns about young leaving the church. The reason I am leery is because of the mindset. It is that same mindset as John's disciples who expressed their concern to John that Jesus was baptizing and all were coming to him. Few leaders and fellowships have the mindset of a servant which John expressed to his disciples. He understood the importance that Jesus must ascend even as John must descend.
A similar response among youth and church leadership
I'm not so much concerned about who goes where or comes from where as much as what they UNDERSTAND about their decision to come/go and do what it is that attracts or compels them. This is true whether it involves the manner of praise in a particular fellowship or the social action of that fellowship.
Invariably, the response by those captivated by the concerns revealed in studies such as this is to either ramp up or cut back on whatever it is they are or are not doing (such as praise, social action, etc.) in order to increase or cutoff the flow of those either coming or going to this church or that church. These responses, unfortunately, are in the same vein as those who decide to leave or to come. The similarity of the response by youth and church leadership is in their lack understanding.
First social action in New Testament
The Bible example on social action is specific. It is the first instance in the NT of the social action (a term not necessarily wrong or evil) by the church. It's not merely that the term does no appear in the NT, but that the concept was not in the church's agenda.
However, that first social action itself was not to those in the world but to the widows in needs. (Acts 6) Certainly, it was not an attempt by the church then, as she so typically seeks today, to change a social status or reform society. This is not to say the church ought not or lacks biblical authority to do so, but the charity instance in Acts began with the widows in the church, first.
The NT requirements for serving tables
Furthermore, I have often noted the requirement by the apostles for those who were to take on this menial task of serving tables. They were to be "full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom." It is significant that the Holy Spirit displayed for the church the work of two to the seven selected for this task, not for their distribution to the widows, but their powerful preaching. They were Stephen and Philip.
The Holy Spirit gives words
Is this to say the church ought to increase or cutback on her social action in the community? No. It is to say that when individuals or the church collectively serves widows, mow lawns, drive elderly to their medical appointments, etc., that the fullness of the Holy Spirit is to be evident for all who draw near to them to inquire what and why they have come to do such a thing. I would not presume to dictate or script response flash cards for those workers. The Holy Spirit through a reading and discussion of the Acts 6 passage is able to give insight and understanding but He is always there with a ready word (Luke 12:12) for those who are about the Father's business of serving tables.
I am leery about a study which focuses on concerns about young leaving the church. The reason I am leery is because of the mindset. It is that same mindset as John's disciples who expressed their concern to John that Jesus was baptizing and all were coming to him. Few leaders and fellowships have the mindset of a servant which John expressed to his disciples. He understood the importance that Jesus must ascend even as John must descend.
A similar response among youth and church leadership
I'm not so much concerned about who goes where or comes from where as much as what they UNDERSTAND about their decision to come/go and do what it is that attracts or compels them. This is true whether it involves the manner of praise in a particular fellowship or the social action of that fellowship.
Invariably, the response by those captivated by the concerns revealed in studies such as this is to either ramp up or cut back on whatever it is they are or are not doing (such as praise, social action, etc.) in order to increase or cutoff the flow of those either coming or going to this church or that church. These responses, unfortunately, are in the same vein as those who decide to leave or to come. The similarity of the response by youth and church leadership is in their lack understanding.
First social action in New Testament
The Bible example on social action is specific. It is the first instance in the NT of the social action (a term not necessarily wrong or evil) by the church. It's not merely that the term does no appear in the NT, but that the concept was not in the church's agenda.
However, that first social action itself was not to those in the world but to the widows in needs. (Acts 6) Certainly, it was not an attempt by the church then, as she so typically seeks today, to change a social status or reform society. This is not to say the church ought not or lacks biblical authority to do so, but the charity instance in Acts began with the widows in the church, first.
The NT requirements for serving tables
Furthermore, I have often noted the requirement by the apostles for those who were to take on this menial task of serving tables. They were to be "full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom." It is significant that the Holy Spirit displayed for the church the work of two to the seven selected for this task, not for their distribution to the widows, but their powerful preaching. They were Stephen and Philip.
The Holy Spirit gives words
Is this to say the church ought to increase or cutback on her social action in the community? No. It is to say that when individuals or the church collectively serves widows, mow lawns, drive elderly to their medical appointments, etc., that the fullness of the Holy Spirit is to be evident for all who draw near to them to inquire what and why they have come to do such a thing. I would not presume to dictate or script response flash cards for those workers. The Holy Spirit through a reading and discussion of the Acts 6 passage is able to give insight and understanding but He is always there with a ready word (Luke 12:12) for those who are about the Father's business of serving tables.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
When the perfect comes
Theology is what we know of and about God. The theology about our belief in God in Christ Jesus is sometimes influenced and shaped in America by what I call bumper sticker theology. We have seen this bumper sticker message: Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven. These make great sound bites and have just enough of a faint biblical ring to be embraced as sound doctrine by some. However, they do little to create a bold confidence in the believer.
The truth is despite the call of Jesus to be perfect much is said to dilute and downgrade that call to something less than an attainable perfection. Similarly, Paul’s numerous and seemingly casual references to the saints being perfect instill little confidence in the saints in Christ. Perfection is viewed as unattainable in this life primarily because it is mistakenly seen as the attainment of a sinless state; a notion complete foreign to the scriptures. Perfection is viewed as something that awaits the saints when we reach heaven. Perfection is definitely neither bland nor unexciting.
These different views of perfection and being perfect affect our interpretation of scripture. One such example is the teleion of first Corinthians 13:10 passage, “but when the perfect (teleion) comes.” The views presented here, as these are perceived by different people, range from the daily to the hopeful to the unexciting of human response to scripture.
There is a need to understand this passage is as vital and important as all scripture. Any neglect or refusal to examine it for an understanding leaves the believer exposed and susceptible to the belief, acceptance and practice of things which have little to do with love and less with scripture.
1. The perfect is agape, love.
2. The perfect is the second coming of Jesus, the eschaton.
3. The perfect is the completed canon New Testament scripture.
The perfect is agape, love.
The first view of the perfect as being love may be primarily due to the heavy influence of the subject of love in chapter 13. Love seems such a natural, daily expression it just seems like no better fit for the passage. The key problem with this view is that the love of which Paul speaks was present (verse 4ff) already and he states that love remains (verse 13) after the perfect comes. With or without gifts the Corinthians, Paul reminds them, they have love.
This is not to negate or belittle the power and love of God towards us or in our daily lives, but as an explanation for the perfect it does not appear to offer the best response to the question of the perfect.
The second coming of Jesus, the eschaton.
The second view draws on the numerous undisputable references by Paul to the eschaton, the (second) coming of Jesus in the Corinthian letter. A few of these references include 1.8f; 2.6; 3.13, 15, 17, 22; 4.4f; 4.8f; 4.19; 5.5; 6.2f; 6.9f; 6.14; 7.17-24, 26, 29, 31; 9.24f; 10.11; 11.26, 29, 32; 15.12ff; 16.22. The problem with this view is it seems to inject the second coming of Jesus as a solution to the problems (which span the context of chapters 12 thru 14) of selfish speakers and their disregard for the edification of the disciples in the chaotic worship assembly in Corinth.
The anticipation in the first century of the return of Jesus was a source of much excitement. It is good that we can look forward excitedly to his coming as we live our daily lives for his glory, but as an explanation for the perfect this does not appear to be the best response.
The perfect is the completed canon New Testament scripture.
The third view for the perfect acknowledges, understands and accepts the need and power of love in the assembly of the saints, but sees the passage as concerning the complete canon of scripture. It also acknowledges, understands and accepts the promise of the second coming of Jesus. These matters are undeniable and true.
However, the context, again spanning from chapters 12 thru 14, concerns knowledge and understanding in the context of the worship assembly. Paul introduces this idea as the direction he will follow in 12:1-3 contrasting the way of pagans who are led astray by dumb idols with the disciples in Christ who are led and speak in the Spirit of God.
Tracking backwards from verse 10 the connectors “for” and “but” in verses 9 and 10 respectively suggest the content of the verse is related to the “know” of verse 9 and the “knowledge” of verse 8. As many gifts of knowledge, tongues, prophecy as the disciples at Corinth had in the church they knew only bits and pieces.
Paul’s use of a phrase which has been overlooked in much of this discussion may be the important element towards clarification and understanding this passage. His use of the phrase face to face rings familiar back to the time when God in Numbers 12 spelled out for all time the definition of a prophet. God, in so doing, distinguished Moses from the prophet category.
Paul and the saints in Christ in the first century, like Moses, received the knowledge of the will of God “face to face.” This expression in itself needs to be understood and is outside the scope of this article. Suffice it to say since Moses was not granted his request (Exodus 33) to see the glory (face) of God it should be understood the expression does not necessarily translate to a face to face encounter. Rather it is the clarity with which God spoke to Moses. The Christians at Corinth were seeing things “in a mirror dimly.” They were looking, albeit dimly, directly into the revelation of the will of God and it was not as though the revelation was not clear or not understandable. The idea of the mirror imagery is that what they were seeing was becoming clearer. There was no need to look elsewhere or trust anyone other then the Spirit for the revelation of the will of God.
The analogy of a child by the apostle Paul is the final word in chapter 13 which further strengthens the conclusion of the perfect as being the complete canon of scripture. A child does not merely put away childish things. He becomes a man and takes on the things of a man so as to carry on the work of God. Scripture is not just so many bits and pieces of thoughts from the mind of God for us. These words are themselves, Jesus said, life and they are spirit. These are the words which flow from the innermost of the believer which are spirit and give life to all who hear the believer.
This view lacks what some perceive as the emotion of love. However, inasmuch as this concerns the communication of God for his people it is not without love. This view lacks, as is perceived by some, the excitement of the glorious event such as the return of Jesus for his church. Yet, this view of the perfect as the complete canon of scripture reflects what it also reveals: A love of believers for the word of God even as every day draws us one day closer to the coming of Jesus.
The truth is despite the call of Jesus to be perfect much is said to dilute and downgrade that call to something less than an attainable perfection. Similarly, Paul’s numerous and seemingly casual references to the saints being perfect instill little confidence in the saints in Christ. Perfection is viewed as unattainable in this life primarily because it is mistakenly seen as the attainment of a sinless state; a notion complete foreign to the scriptures. Perfection is viewed as something that awaits the saints when we reach heaven. Perfection is definitely neither bland nor unexciting.
These different views of perfection and being perfect affect our interpretation of scripture. One such example is the teleion of first Corinthians 13:10 passage, “but when the perfect (teleion) comes.” The views presented here, as these are perceived by different people, range from the daily to the hopeful to the unexciting of human response to scripture.
There is a need to understand this passage is as vital and important as all scripture. Any neglect or refusal to examine it for an understanding leaves the believer exposed and susceptible to the belief, acceptance and practice of things which have little to do with love and less with scripture.
1. The perfect is agape, love.
2. The perfect is the second coming of Jesus, the eschaton.
3. The perfect is the completed canon New Testament scripture.
The perfect is agape, love.
The first view of the perfect as being love may be primarily due to the heavy influence of the subject of love in chapter 13. Love seems such a natural, daily expression it just seems like no better fit for the passage. The key problem with this view is that the love of which Paul speaks was present (verse 4ff) already and he states that love remains (verse 13) after the perfect comes. With or without gifts the Corinthians, Paul reminds them, they have love.
This is not to negate or belittle the power and love of God towards us or in our daily lives, but as an explanation for the perfect it does not appear to offer the best response to the question of the perfect.
The second coming of Jesus, the eschaton.
The second view draws on the numerous undisputable references by Paul to the eschaton, the (second) coming of Jesus in the Corinthian letter. A few of these references include 1.8f; 2.6; 3.13, 15, 17, 22; 4.4f; 4.8f; 4.19; 5.5; 6.2f; 6.9f; 6.14; 7.17-24, 26, 29, 31; 9.24f; 10.11; 11.26, 29, 32; 15.12ff; 16.22. The problem with this view is it seems to inject the second coming of Jesus as a solution to the problems (which span the context of chapters 12 thru 14) of selfish speakers and their disregard for the edification of the disciples in the chaotic worship assembly in Corinth.
The anticipation in the first century of the return of Jesus was a source of much excitement. It is good that we can look forward excitedly to his coming as we live our daily lives for his glory, but as an explanation for the perfect this does not appear to be the best response.
The perfect is the completed canon New Testament scripture.
The third view for the perfect acknowledges, understands and accepts the need and power of love in the assembly of the saints, but sees the passage as concerning the complete canon of scripture. It also acknowledges, understands and accepts the promise of the second coming of Jesus. These matters are undeniable and true.
However, the context, again spanning from chapters 12 thru 14, concerns knowledge and understanding in the context of the worship assembly. Paul introduces this idea as the direction he will follow in 12:1-3 contrasting the way of pagans who are led astray by dumb idols with the disciples in Christ who are led and speak in the Spirit of God.
Tracking backwards from verse 10 the connectors “for” and “but” in verses 9 and 10 respectively suggest the content of the verse is related to the “know” of verse 9 and the “knowledge” of verse 8. As many gifts of knowledge, tongues, prophecy as the disciples at Corinth had in the church they knew only bits and pieces.
Paul’s use of a phrase which has been overlooked in much of this discussion may be the important element towards clarification and understanding this passage. His use of the phrase face to face rings familiar back to the time when God in Numbers 12 spelled out for all time the definition of a prophet. God, in so doing, distinguished Moses from the prophet category.
Paul and the saints in Christ in the first century, like Moses, received the knowledge of the will of God “face to face.” This expression in itself needs to be understood and is outside the scope of this article. Suffice it to say since Moses was not granted his request (Exodus 33) to see the glory (face) of God it should be understood the expression does not necessarily translate to a face to face encounter. Rather it is the clarity with which God spoke to Moses. The Christians at Corinth were seeing things “in a mirror dimly.” They were looking, albeit dimly, directly into the revelation of the will of God and it was not as though the revelation was not clear or not understandable. The idea of the mirror imagery is that what they were seeing was becoming clearer. There was no need to look elsewhere or trust anyone other then the Spirit for the revelation of the will of God.
The analogy of a child by the apostle Paul is the final word in chapter 13 which further strengthens the conclusion of the perfect as being the complete canon of scripture. A child does not merely put away childish things. He becomes a man and takes on the things of a man so as to carry on the work of God. Scripture is not just so many bits and pieces of thoughts from the mind of God for us. These words are themselves, Jesus said, life and they are spirit. These are the words which flow from the innermost of the believer which are spirit and give life to all who hear the believer.
This view lacks what some perceive as the emotion of love. However, inasmuch as this concerns the communication of God for his people it is not without love. This view lacks, as is perceived by some, the excitement of the glorious event such as the return of Jesus for his church. Yet, this view of the perfect as the complete canon of scripture reflects what it also reveals: A love of believers for the word of God even as every day draws us one day closer to the coming of Jesus.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
The Submission of Jesus
I agree with the video message content. A bit of rough wording near the end is of no consequence overall. I posted this message in a thread discussion on Facebook originally.
Islam means submission Muslims inform us. There could be no greater irony to a claim of the Muslim SUBMISSION to God and their total unbelief and rejection of Jesus. What Muslims can not believe and can not accept is Jesus complete SUBMISSION of his WILL to the Father.
As much as I value and love scholarly study of the original language Christians, as well Muslims language scholars, lose themselves and their audience with their nothing-but-bland, convoluted explanations from the original language. The video (John 5:30) is an perfect example.
The point of John 5:30 (and similar passages) is so ignorantly and blindly overrun by Muslims (as well as some Christians). The Muslim conclusion of the verse that Jesus is weak, hence not God, reveals their total lack of the same SUBMISSION they claim about Islam. They measure Jesus' words in terms of fleshly strength, not the might of the will. It is this WILL that Jesus asserted throughout the gospels he would SUBMIT to the WILL of the FATHER.
They can neither accept the SUBMISSION of Jesus (regardless whether or not they acknowledge his divinity) nor even CONSIDER that God is big enough that He, unlike man, knows how, is not afraid to, can and WILL SUBMIT himself. What could God possibly SUBMIT himself his WILL? It is is easy to disregard and discard his birth, his words, his miracles, but it is his DEATH to which He WILLFULLY SUBMITTED himself that is for anyone who would put their trust in Jesus to understand and imitate in their own DEATH to self and sin.
Putting one's trust in Jesus is impossible without the SUBMISSION of the WILL of the individual.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
