Stoned-Campbell Disciple

Scripture:

“Justice, and only justice, you shall pursue,
so that you may live and occupy the land
that the LORD your God is giving you.” (Deuteronomy 16.20)

“Seek good, not evil,
that you may live.
Then the Lord God Almighty will be with you,
just as you say he is.
Hate evil, love good;
maintain justice in the courts.
Perhaps the Lord God Almighty will have mercy
on the remnant of Joseph.” (Amos 5.14-15)

“This is what the Lord Almighty said:
‘Administer true justice;
show mercy and compassion to one another.
Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless,
the alien or the poor.
Do not plot evil against each other.’” (Zechariah 7.9-10)

“The righteous know the rights of the poor;
the wicked have no such understanding.” (Proverbs 29.7)

These out loud thoughts are an attempt to think as a disciple of Jesus on this matter. They are thoughts not written in stone.

Many white Americans became graphically aware that we have a problem with police brutality through the lynchings of Ahmaud Arbery, Botham Jean, George Floyd and now Tyre Nichols. People of color in the USA, black, brown, yellow have been all to familiar with this streak of bloodshed through long experience.

Others, usually people who have skin like mine, insist that these incidents are really “blown out of proportion” and there is no systemic issue at all.  After some serious reading on the history of policing in the USA, I have concluded that there is in indeed systemic issues. The Tyre Nichols case practically explodes this in our face.  I summarize the long sordid tale of police violence as “institutionalized sadism.”  But it is a problem that is far bigger than one person. Bigger than one officer too.  It is a system.  We understand how “operating systems” can have enormous impacts upon our computers, phones, cars, etc.  Our society also behaves like a “system” for good or ill. 

What can we do? I honestly do not know and am only thinking out loud.

I was up late last night reflecting on some of the back and forth discussions that erupted on my wall yesterday. I have had a few offline discussions as well regarding it.

Unlike people of color, I have no experiential knowledge to draw upon. But I do draw on the testimony of my sisters and brothers of color. I believe them when they testify that they live in fear of the police. I believe them when they say they are targeted. So I want to share some of my thought processes right now.

• Principalities and powers are real.

• Evil is Bigger than Us.

Again, I think about this as a person who believes in the Story in Scripture.  In Scripture we encounter the Principalities and Powers in places like Colossians (1.16; 2.13-15; whole book arguably), Romans (8.19-22, 38-39), 1 Corinthians (2.8; 15.25-26); Ephesians (6.10-20), Revelation and other places.

If the cosmic powers (like a system) are real then they still operate in our own world as they did Paul’s. These Principalities and Powers are first the enemies of God; second, they are the enemies of God’s good creation.  They vandalize and disrupt shalom. Where would principalities and powers take up residence in our world? It seems to me they would go to places where the most harm can be done:

• Government

• Law enforcement

• Churches

At least some in our world can imagine something like this happening. In the 2017 movie, Wonder Woman, the god Aries takes up residence among the governments in both Germany and England. When we look at the history of policing in the United States it is certainly more than possible that malevolent evil has inhabited the halls of justice and perverting them into venues of institutional sadism. 

Walter Wink, in Engaging the Powers, and Marva Dawn, in Powers, Weakness, and the Tabernacling of God, ask how Christians can engage such powers that are greater than any one of us. If the Cross actually unmasks the powers (Col 2.15) then it is in the Cross that we find the power of God for defeating the powers.

But it is right here that I think the church has colluded with the principalities and powers themselves. We must consciously embrace values that are fundamentally antithetical to the values of the principalities themselves.

But I think we have put value in the wrong place. As I was tossing and turning in bed last night a passage from Ta-Nehisi Coates came to mind that stuck with me and began fueling my reflections. He notes that cameras, sensitivity training, and even diversity fail to address the real moral issue. “The truth is” he says that police reflect the values, the value, of the greater society in which they operate. What is that value? A few pages later he states, “According to this theory ‘safety’ was a higher value than justice, perhaps the highest value.” (See Between the World and Me, pp. 78-79, 84-85). This is an arresting perspective.

“Safety.” Ohhhhhh how easy it is to baptize that value and to make into a supreme good.  Safety is a higher, greater, good than justice. And the values that flow from justice like compassion, human dignity, self sacrifice of personal gain for the sake of others. In fact, many have explicitly gone this direction by embracing “ethical egoism.” The basic philosophy of Ayn Rand expressed in Atlas Shrugged.

But gross abuse of justice can take place in the interest of “safety“. Heinous crimes are committed in the interest of safety. Safety is, perhaps, the greatest value. The safety of “our way of life.” These crimes are not only overlooked but acceptable and justified because the greatest value is the safety of our stuff, the safety of our money, the safety of our possessions. This is exactly the kind of lie the principalities and powers want us to sell our souls to.

But safety and Justice, especially biblically, are not the same thing.  Righteousness and Justice are practical synonyms. But safety and justice are not by any means.

Injustice in the name of justice is a moral contradiction. When justice is the greatest value then there are numerous actions that can never be embraced precisely because those actions violate what is the good. Justice literally trumps the value of “safety.”  Especially when our safety requires the degradation of another human being.

If we are going remove the powers, then we must tell the Truth to them and to ourselves. If Coates is right and the police actually reflect back to us the highest value that we ourselves hold, then the only way to change the culture of the police is to change the values we hold dear.

What values must we hold dear to defeat the Principalities? Those are the values of the cross. The highest value is not safety. It is justice as reflected throughout the Story and ultimately in the life, death and resurrection of the One who GAVE UP “SAFETY” for the sake of the poor, the disenfranchised, for the excluded. Jesus came to set free those thrown in the prisons (Luke 4.18-19).

“But let justice roll down like waters,
and righteousness like ever flowing waters” (Amos 5.24)

“He has showed you O Human, what is good;
and what does the LORD require of you
but to practice justice, and to love kindness;
and to walk humbly before your God” (Micah 6.8 )

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
For you tithe mint, dill, and cummin,
and have neglected the most important stuff of the law:
justice, mercy and faithfulness” (Matthew 23: 23)

If the police do reflect back to us, the value we as a society embrace, then to change them, we must change ourselves. When we as a society embrace a value of justice we will demand that those who carry a gun and a badge will also hold that value supreme. 

Have we been deceived?

Have we bought into the lie of the Principalities and Powers?

Have we sought safety (and all its abuses) over justice?

I am thinking out loud but as a Christian, I think biblical theology has something to say.

“Therefore every scribe who has become a disciple in the kingdom of heaven is like the master of a household who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old.” (Matthew 13.52)

Many within Churches of Christ seem to think church history is a wasteland. Nothing of consequence has happened. Some think the word “progressive” is evil. How either of these ideas have arisen and anyone with a self-aware mind can accept these notions is beyond me. This is not what our fathers and mothers in the faith have taught us.

“They {average Christians} read the originals {Old & NT} through the spectacles of their vernacular versions, and, superadded to this, through a ready-made theology, imparted to them by early education and high authority – parental or ministerial or both. It has become part and parcel of their individuality. Few can ever divest themselves of it. It is harder, far, to unlearn than to learn.” (Alexander Campbell, Address to the Bible Union Convention, April 2, 1852 in Popular Lectures and Addresses, pp. 568-569).

Isaac Errett put it this way, way back in 1858:

“Though in completeness of its revelations, Christianity is not progressive, yet in the understanding and appreciation of it, and in the development of the divine life to which it calls us, there is necessarily a progressive work. We inherit the wisdom, grace, faith, patience, and toils of eighteen hundred years. We stand where we can overlook all this vast inheritance, and gather in the fruits of the Past.” (Millennial Harbinger, March 1858, p. 142).

We are debtors. We have “inherited wisdom, grace, faith … and toils of eighteen hundred years.” It takes a good deal of blindness to be unaware of the magnitude of the riches we have inherited from the “toils of eighteen hundred years.” The very “bible” we hold in our hands is literally an inheritance. The vast majority of the hymns we sing are an inheritance (in my case every last one of them are because, I don’t know about you, but I have never written a hymn!).

The faith was indeed “once delivered.” But our understanding, our perception, is indeed progressive. Progressive comes from “progress.” Antonyms for progress are not evil, faithless, etc. The antonyms for “progress” include regress, stagnation, failure, decline and retrogression. Synonyms for “progress” are growth, improvement, forward, movement, increase.

Among the debts we have is the progress of understanding the depths of God’s wisdom. Progress in appreciating the faith. We wonder if we are making progress in humility, progress in sacrifice, progress in love.

I’ve been called a “progressive.” And in the sense of Errett, I say YES! And confessing an inheritance of grace and wisdom from those (now) twenty centuries. I am progressive in understanding the revelation of God because I am growing, moving forward, increasing in gratitude for the debt I have, becoming more like Jesus whom I see in the lives of countless saints in those 2000 years.

If we are not progressive then we are in reality regressive in our understanding of that revelation and therefore shriveling on the vine.

Like many people, I’ve always had a fascination with Pompeii. I’ve read a few books the first was Michael Grant’s Cities of Vesuvius: Pompeii and Herculaneum. Peter Oakes book in 2013 called Reading Romans in Pompeii: Paul’s Letter at Ground Level was a nitty gritty book. While in Italy I worked thru Paul Wilkinson’s Pompeii, An Archeological Guide. Oakes book, the first part, makes much more sense having walked the streets and been on the “insula of Menander” itself.

Pompeii is most famous (seemingly) for two things: 1) having been blown up and 2) erotic frescos. But it has the oldest known depiction of a biblical scene too (see below).

The city is much as it was within the New Testament period and offers some unique opportunities to think about a Pharisee apostle of the Jewish Messiah within a typical pagan Greco-Roman city.

There were Jews in Pompeii. Most were slaves. For instance, we know there was a Jewish slave, a prostitute, named Maria (a name familiar from the NT). Sadly, her name (along with others) was scratched as graffiti on the walls of the Lupanar (Latin for brothel). She did not own her body or self in any sense.

In the House of the Physician there is a fresco depicting the oldest known painting of a biblical scene and it is in Pompeii. It is now called “The Judgement of Solomon” and was excavated in 1841 and is presently located in the Museo Archeologico National Napoli (pic in my album). There is scholarly debate over whether the house belonged to a pagan or Jew, but the majority believe it was a pagan home. Many stories from the Torah were well known in pagan circles since the Septuagint had been translated into Greek. We may recall the apostle James, the Lord’s brother, stating that the Torah of Moses had been preached in all the cities (Acts 15.21).

Some Jews seem to have believed that the destruction of Roman cities of Vesuvius was the wrath of the God of Israel. Normally scholars point to Pliny the Younger as the first description of the destruction of Pompeii/Herculaneum. This is only true of a description of the event. Probably the first known reference to the destruction of Pompeii is in a work called The Sibylline Oracles.

Scholar J. J. Collins, editor and translator of the Oracles, notes that Book 4 dates prior to the first century but was redacted by a Jewish author around AD 80. They Priestess/Prophet’s words are a prophecy “in reverse.” The Jewish author interprets the destruction of Pompeii as God’s wrath upon Rome for the wanton destruction of the Jerusalem Temple nine years before (some think the destruction of Pompeii was on or about on the same day as the destruction of the temple). The text reads,

“An evil storm of war will also come upon Jerusalem
from Italy, and it will sack the great Temple of God …
A leader of Rome [Titus] will come … who will burn
the Temple of Jerusalem with fire [and] at the same time slaughter
many men and destroy the great land of the Jews. …

When a firebrand, turned away from a cleft in the earth [Vesuvius]
in the land of Italy, reaches to broad heaven
it will burn many cities and destroy men.
Much smoking ashes will fill the great sky
and showers will fall from heaven like red earth.
Know then the wrath of the heavenly God.”
(Sibylline Oracles 4.115-135,
see James H. Charlesworth, Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol 2, page 387).

Collins notes this is a reference to Vesuvius and Pompeii.

It would appear that another Jew thought the same. At some point, perhaps even during the eruption of Vesuvius someone scratched graffiti upon the wall of House 26, “Sodom Gomorrah.” Most scholars take this to be a Jew writing this with the echo of the fire and death falling up them.

With a nod to earlier in the first century, the great granddaughter of Herod, Julia Drusilla, given the title “Queen” would, along with her son Marcus Antonius Agrippa, die in the volcanic blast of Vesuvius in the city of Pompeii.

A lot is going on in Pompeii. It shows us just how incredibly crowded, noisy, unbelievably filthy, literally awash in sex and paganism the world of Romans, Corinthians, Ephesus, and about half of Acts really was.

Was the destruction of Pompeii, Yahweh’s response to the barbarism of the Temple in AD 70. One Jew thought so and another seems to say Amen. I don’t really know but what is interesting to me is that the world of Pompeii was the world a Pharisee had to negotiate when talking to Gentiles (the Greek word for Gentile is the same as for pagan just an FYI) in his world. Tomorrow I will think about how that world my provoke a response like that in the Wisdom of Solomon and the Epistle to the Romans. Paul, btw, has the same opinion as the sage of the Wisdom of Solomon.

Framing Thought Reading Ephesians

Ephesians has long been my favorite Pauline book. I have read and reread it for years. I went through it with Dr. Richard Oster at Harding Graduate School while living in Grenada, MS years ago. I have preached through it, taught through, done two seminars on it. My views and grasp of Ephesians have been deepened and enriched by many scholars. In my view one of the best ways to describe Ephesians is it is it could easily be a “commentary” or “interpretation” of Romans 9-15.

The Jewish apostle, a Pharisee, to Gentiles works mightily to show Gentiles that they are now incorporated into (fellow heirs) the God of Israel’s historic Covenant People, Israel. As such they are now equal with ethnic Jews, by grace. At the same time, they do not “replace” Israel” they are brought into Israel itself by the Jewish Messiah, King Jesus. All of this is, in Ephesians language “to the praise of his glory.” Again, if we read Romans 9-15 and then read Ephesians 1-6 there is remarkable “connectivity.” In my view, Paul speaks primarily if not exclusively to Gentiles in Ephesians.

Reading Ephesians, like all of Paul’s epistles, must be approached through the Hebrew Bible (Gen-Malachi). This is not the only context that informs Paul but it is the primary one. The Torah, the history of Israel, the Prophets, the Psalms, the Temple are the “inkwell” Paul has Tychicus dip his reed into for writing.

The language of Ephesians is both shaped by the Hebrew Bible (especially its Greek translation the Septuagint) and Israel’s long history worship. We all know language that sounds “like church.” When a brother or sister leads prayer and it is filled with echoes of traditional words used primarily in the worship we recognize it immediately.

Ephesians, from the very first sentence, sounds like one of the great worship Gatherings in the Temple courts. Long sentences sound “lyrical” as material fitting for worship Gathering in the Jerusalem Temple. If words on a page could have an aroma, the ink Tychicus used smells like the Temple of Yahweh.

I frequently read Ephesians with the Psalms of Ascents (Pss 120-134) and Psalms 15 and Psalm 24. I encourage you to do that. “Tuning” our ears to “here”” is very helpful. And the “world” of Ephesians is very much like these Psalm texts (in the very book Paul tells the Ephesians to go sing so they can learn the “will of God” (5.17, 19).

OUR TEXT, 5.1-2

In our text, Paul is reframing the life of the former pagan Gentiles. He has told them “you MUST NOT live as Gentiles any more” (4.17; cf. 2.11; 3.1; 3.8 ). Paul gives a laundry list of Gentile ways in 4.17-32.

With the word “therefore” (5.1) Paul tells the Gentiles to be “imitators of God.” This is the God of Israel whom they at one point did not know (2.12). Look at the God of Israel and do what that God does in the ways that that God does them. This is quite a radical thought for former pagans because the gods were not models to imitate. One did not want to be like Zeus unless they were a moral reprobate.

Here Paul is saying the same thing Moses does in Leviticus, “be holy for I am holy.” Paul calls for divine imitation. The Jerusalem Council (Acts 15) bound Leviticus 17 and 18 upon Gentiles with its emphasis on holiness, especially against various kinds of fornication. Paul warns against this very thing in 5.3-5.

But he makes the God of Israel the model. Just as Leviticus does. They will be “children of light” (Israel was to be the light of the world, Isaiah 49.6 & 60.1-3, just as Yahweh wraps himself in “light” (Psalm 104.1, etc).

But Paul grounds their ways of life in worship, specifically the Messiah’s own sacrifice. Sacrifice is an act of worship and Jesus the Messiah offering himself as a “fragrant offering” is also an liturgical act of worship. These offerings in the Temple were accompanied by “psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” btw where the Gathered “saints” praised the Lord through the sacrifice as a graciously forgiven, healed and blessed people.

THE WAYS OF LOVE, AROMA OF SACRIFICE

So, Paul uses the word “love” in three different grammatical forms in Ephesians 5.1-2. An adjective. A noun. And a verb. This stresses the contrast of their former state. They once were “by nature children of wrath” (2.3). BUT NOW they are (an epic change has occurred)

“Beloved children” (an adjective)

Told to

“live in love” (a noun)

Because Messiah (King of Israel) has

“loved us” (a verb)

Beloved. Love. Loved.

The most powerful motivation to live like God is to know how much the God of Israel loves us and sacrificed for us. This divine love is on every page of the Hebrew Bible, indeed God’s very “name” seems to be “Steadfast Love” (Hesed, Exodus 34.6). This truth thunders in the Psalms 176x. But its ultimate revelation is the gift of the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth. Oh what objects of love God’s creation is (cf.. Psalm 103, Psalm 104, Psalm 136). Not just Jews but for Gentiles too!

Gentiles who did not even know who Yahweh was are loved and beloved by Yahweh.

If we “imitate” God’s love then we will be willing to also be a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God as we love one another. We become altars of God – altars of love – in a world consumed with greed, malice, and degrading one another. The Gathered People of God is supposed to be an Altar of Incense. Not because we have power over anyone, a sacrifice surrendered.

Love is that sweet smelling aroma that fills the Temple of God where the Holy Spirit dwells.

Paul tells the Gentiles, God loved you (and Jews too) so much that he allowed the promised Jewish Messiah to die as a shalom offering that heals the breach between the pagans and the Creator God of Israel but also between the Gentiles and the Jews. They are BEloved. They are objects of love. They are planted in love (3.17).

Former Gentile Life is Reframed first in GOD’S love. Second, they are to respond by imitating God’s love. Third, they are Reframed through the Messiah’s own imitation of God’s love for them. Our life is surrounded by and rooted in divine love. This, and only this, will mark them as the People of God.

Now they imitate God by loving to the extreme. This is how we are children of light.

Shalom.

When Matthew penned his conclusion to his story of King Jesus the son of David, he intended us to hear it as the conclusion to his book. His book is the story of the “King of the Jews.” There was no “New Testament” there was however Matthew’s Gospel and the Hebrew Bible of which Matthew explicitly links his story.

The conclusion, which is now known as “The Great Commission “ a name it never had until 1800 (coined by Hudson Taylor) years after Matthew wrote, connects with the opening and ever ignored genealogy.

“The book of genesis of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David.” Matthew summarizes the entire history of Israel in his genealogy. He names many but David alone is called “King.” David is the King. Jesus is his “son.” Jesus is the Messiah, the “anointed” (1.16). Matthew follows this up with the naming of Jesus saying he will be called “Emmanuel” (1.23), that is “God with us.” This is followed by gentiles seeking the one “BORN KING of the Jews” (2.1-2). These all show up in the “Great Commission.” All are understood by Matthew’s connection to the Hebrew Bible.

1) Jesus’s words are drenched in the Hebrew Bible in which Matthew has placed his story of Jesus the King of the Jews. The King is fulfilling Israel’s original mission and empowering his followers to share in that mission.

2) “heaven and earth” a deeply Hebrew way of describing all Yahweh’s created realm. The phrase peppers the Hebrew Bible but none more important than the Book of Genesis which Matthew has termed his own book of King Jesus (Genesis 1.1; etc, etc; Mt 1.1). The Jewish King is now claiming all of God’s creation.
3) Jesus then says “all authority given to me.” No Jew missed this. Here is Davidic language. First Matthew has already told us in the skipped genealogy that Jesus is the “Son of David,” that he was “born to be king of the Jews” and that he was crucified as the “King of the Jews.” “Having been given” is what Jesus says (Ἐδόθη) an aorist passive verb, Jesus received something, he did not take something. Isael’s king’s authority was derivative; it comes from God. He is established on the throne as we will see.

Jesus statement, in the narrative of the Gospel, comes after Yahweh has reversed the decree of the rebellious nations who mocked and made war upon the “king of the Jews.” Psalm 2, a critical text throughout the NT writings, supplies the framework. Yahweh, the God of Israel, sits in heaven and laughs at the arrogance of the nations that make war upon “the LORD’s anointed.” Yahweh, in the face of their rebellion, has “installed my king on Zion, my holy hill.” The kings of the world are then commanded to come acknowledge the Lordship of the King of Israel (this is a frequent theme in the Psalms btw). In Psalm 2 the Lord’s “anointed” is also God’s king whom he installs upon the throne.

Jesus says ALL authority, in all God’s created order, has now been given to him because Yahweh has made him king. He was born King. The nations conspired (and the powers in Israel colluded) against him. Yet Yahweh has installed him as King anyway. Jesus is the Davidic King. The commission is to inform the nations a new king is in town. Now Jesus confesses the reality of what is proclaimed in Matthew 1.1.
4) “making disciples of all nations.” Matthew has already told us the pagans came seeking the Jewish king (Mt 2.1-2). But here Jesus, the anointed and installed King of the Jews, is assuming the very role that God created Israel for in the first place. He is after all the “son of Abraham” too (Mt 1.1). All nations will be blessed through Abraham (Gen 12.3). Israel was created to be a “light to the nations” (Isa 49.1-7). Israel was to the world what the tribe of Levi was to Israel, set apart as Priests. They were to intercede for, to worship for, to be a light … to show the glory of the One full of Hesed. Israel by and large failed in that calling by mimicking the nations treatment of the poor, the orphans, the widows, the aliens all usually rooted in the false worship of idolatry (are we any different??). But Jesus the anointed King, the representative of all Israel, has in fact been faithful. The Psalms are loaded with calls for the nations to come and worship the God of Israel. Now Jesus tells his disciples the faithful King of the Jews has been installed by God, it is time to tell the nations to acknowledge him and worship.

“Baptizing them.” Passing through water is deeply embedded in the Story of Israel. The Exodus was not just gracious God deliverance from slavery but a passage through water to a new life free from the aroma of death in Egypt. Israel would pass through water again to enter into the Promised Land. It is this very symbolism that lies behind John the Baptizer’s ministry at the Jordan River. It was alive and well with the Essenes of Qumran. The Pharisee Apostle Paul, states point blank that former Gentiles (ethne) at Corinth went through a “baptism” like the Israelites (1 Cor 10). Here at the conclusion of Matthew’s Gospel, the King of the Jews says that the pagans will pass through water too.

5) “teaching them to obey all.” Throughout the Gospel of Matthew Jesus is not only presented as the Son of David but he routinely sounds like Moses, especially in Deuteronomy. Moses at the end of his ministry, like Jesus at the end of his earthly ministry in Matthew, exhorts his disciples (Israel is Moses’s disciples). Israel was to demonstrate to the world the wisdom and nearness of Yahweh, “Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people.” ‘What other nation is so great as to have their gods near them the way the LORD our God is near us whenever we pray to him?” (4.6-7). So in a passage that Matthew has already shown us was near Jesus’s heart when he was in the Wilderness being tested (i.e. is he a faithful son??), Deuteronomy 8. Moses says, “Be careful to follow every command I am giving you” (8.1; cf. v.6, etc, etc). What is the content of this? The Gospel of Matthew itself! The Sermon on the Mount. The Parables of the Kingdom in Matthew 13. “I did not come to destroy the law …” Servanthood. Judgement (Mt 25). And that Jesus is King of the Jews. The nations will come to Israel’s King and listen as he, like Moses, delivers the faithful word from the throne of David.

6) “I am with you …” This is the return to Matthew’s opening. It is also in the middle of Matthew, “where two or three are gathered in my name I am with you.” But this, and do not miss this, is one of the most fundamental declarations of the Hebrew Bible. Yahweh delivers Israel and then dwells in their midst. “I will place my dwelling in your midst” (Leviticus 26.9-13). “Do not fear for I am with you” (Isaiah 41.10; Jeremiah 42.11; Haggai 2.5; etc, etc, etc, etc). We can literally cite dozens of texts.

7) What does all this mean? The so called “Great Commission” is not something new. It is in fact the very mission of Israel from the beginning. Jesus has been declared to be King by God himself and installed as “my king in Zion.” This King, unlike even David the King (recall the genealogy reminds us of David’s sexual assault upon Bathsheba, 1.6b), has been faithful. In the King, Israel is finally living up to what she was created for, a light and a blessing to the pagans (ethne means both gentiles/nations and pagans). The Great Commission shows at the conclusion of the first book of the New Testament that God’s People will always have:

The Same God
The Same Promise
The Same King
The Same Mission

In fact our commission means nothing “separate and apart” from the Hebrew Bible and what it contains. It is in the providence and wisdom of the Holy Spirit of God that the Gospel of Matthew is the first book we are invited to hear in our assemblies for in the Second Century there were strong and powerful currents that wanted to deny everything we have just written. They were called Marcionites.

Thank you for reading. Be blessed.

I received a message because I wrote about the Psalms.

“Brother …, 2 Ti 2:15 tells us to rightly divide the word of truth. Rightly divide means to divide the Old Testament from the New Testament. We are not under the old law.”

This brother regularly posts similar misunderstandings on my posts. My Reply was as follows:

“Rightly divide” has nothing whatsoever to do with “dividing” that is separating, the “Old Testament” and the “New Testament.” Not only is there not a shred of evidence from the context to support such a position that is not what the word means.

That particular translation comes from the KJV from 1611. What that phrase meant in 1611 did not MEAN to distinguish or separate OT from NT. Nor does 2 Timothy 2.15 have that meaning today.

A person does not need to know Greek to “study to show themselves approved.” They can pull down multiple translations to make sure they are “correctly understanding” what the text actually says. The value of numerous translations is they help us understand what is actually said.

So, what does Paul say to Timothy in 2 Timothy 2.15. He says not one iota about distinguishing between the “Old” Testament (something neither Paul nor Timothy had ever heard of in their entire life) and the “New” Testament (something neither Paul nor Timothy had also never heard of). Here are various translations of 2 Timothy 2.15:

“handling aright the word of truth” (ASV)
“interprets the message of truth correctly” (CEB)
“rightly handling the word of truth” (ESV)
“correctly teaches the message of God’s truth” (TEV)
“teaching the message of truth accurately” (NET)
“correctly handles the word of truth” (NIV)
“correctly explains the word of truth” (NLT)
“rightly explaining the word of truth” (NRSV)

Second Timothy 2.15, ironically, is not “rightly divided” when some one claims it is dividing the “Old Testament” from the “New Testament.”

I posted this on Facebook a year ago today (August 28, 2024). Seems even more relevant than then …

MY POLITICAL/AMERICAN QUESTION: I normally stay out of overt political discussion (I do have theological perspectives on the issues). But today, I ask a question as an American. I grew up in the South and was either a Republican or politically conservative voter all my voting life (ive been part of no party since 2008). I’ve had the privilege of seeing Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. But the GOP today is not even remotely what it was before.

So here is my question for those committed to Donald Trump. I have many issues with Donald Trump from a purely Christian point of view. From an American POV, January 6 was the biggest embarrassment in the history of the United States. My view is DT is absolutely responsible for that debacle and refused to ensure the American Miracle. The USA has had numerous hotly contested elections from Thomas Jefferson to Abraham Lincoln to James A. Garfield to Harry Truman … some in the middle of a Civil War (Lincoln) and there has NEVER been anything like January 6. Ronald Reagan in his inaugural address addressed President Jimmy Carter and Vice President Walter Mondale, Tip O’Neal and others there on the steps of the Capital and described the peaceful transfer of power between opposing political parties as an American “Miracle.” (Follow link Reagan on American Miracle).

1) “Does it not concern you that the vast majority of those who served on his staff and in his Administration have refused to endorse him and a large number actively campaign against him?

2) “Do you think these people have suddenly become Democrats?

3) “Does it even give you reason for concern?”

I confess it does me.

My question(s) are quite specific.

I have never witnessed anything like the repudiation of Trump by his former staff. I have never seen a Vice President publicly say “I will not endorse” the President he served under. Mike Pence was the rave of Evangelicals while serving as VP but has suddenly become persona nongrata. On what grounds? Here is an extremely partial list of Trump’s former Admin members who have publicly refused to endorse him:

Mike Pence (his VP);
Mike Esper (Defense Secretary);
Cassidy Hutchison (senior staff member aka access to the Oval Office);
Stephanie Grisham (Press Secretary);
Sarah Matthews (Deputy Press Secretary);
Ty Cobb (White House Counsel);
Alyssa Farah Griffin (White House Communications Director);
John Bolton (National Security Advisor);
Mike Mulvaney (Chief of Staff);
General John Kelly (Chief of Staff);
General Mark Milley (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs);
General Jim Mattis (Defense Secretary);
General H. R. McMaster (National Security Advisor)
Etc., etc., etc.

This is a STUNNING list that can go on for a mile. In fact over 200 former members of Trump’s staff and Administration have publicly endorsed Harris. Again I have never witnessed anything quite like this. Most of these were dyed in the wool supporters at one time. Are we to believe these people have suddenly become Democrats who “hate” America?

I will post a link to a portion Ronald Reagan’s speech. Reagan publicly commends President Carter for ensuring this miracle. I cannot even imagine DJ making such a gracious speech. Just as G. H. W. Bush did when he lost to President Clinton. And what President Obama did himself for Donald Trump! Donald J. Trump is the only President in the history of the United States to spit in the face of America (as i see it).

I will post links for Mike Pence too.

So if you can be RESPECTFUL, no acrimony (no epitaphs, no diatribes, I will delete any bile) I would love to hear why the POV of the people who worked with Trump intimately has absolutely no influence upon you. Please comment below and watch links especially if you are pro-Trump.

The Apostle Paul writes to Timothy in Ephesus the following oft quoted words,

“Anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim 5.8, NIV).

I was asked to provide my understanding of this verse, so I am happy to do so.

One of the massive disservices that is done to modern readers by translations of the Bible like the King James Version, the New King James Version and the New American Standard is the printing of individual verses as an independent paragraph. It appears as if this verse (as the rest) is something of an aphorism or a generalized truth. It is neither. Always think paragraphs in narratives and epistles. Never think verse. Always think Paragraphs. Always.

I frequently say, like a broken record at PV and Eastside that there are two rules for reading the Bible: context and context. First Timothy 5. 8 is in a paragraph. The words in the sentence and the sentence as a whole have meaning in that paragraph and the subject matter under consideration by Paul.

Verse 8 (quoted above) is part of a paragraph that begins in v.3 and the section goes down to v.16. Verse 8 is in the middle of this discussion. Here Paul is addressing the entire church, “give proper attention/recognition to WIDOWS who are really in need.” In fact Paul is addressing Timothy and the gathered church through him as the letter is read to the whole congregation. Neither this verse nor any verse in First Timothy (nor any epistle in the NT) is addressed to non-Christians/unbelievers/the world. It is the widows of the church that are in need.

In the historical context of Ephesus these widows need not be in their 80s or 90s. In fact we know they are not. They are more likely in their 20s and 30s (a person in their 40s was a senior citizen).

Paul is concerned about two things simultaneously:

1) the care of the poor – in this case widows (a massive theme in Scripture, I mean massive; Deut 10.12-22; Ps 72; James 1.27; etc):

2) the resources of the local church to be used for those in genuine need. Most of the members themselves will be on the lower economic spectrum, a number likely slaves themselves. So Paul counsels younger widows to get remarried (v.14).

Here Paul is concerned about those who cannot get remarried or those who have no one to take care of them (there was no social security in the first century Roman Empire). Those widows who have either children or grandchildren (i.e. family), it is those children or grandchildren should take in the widow. That is v.4. The “anyone” of verse 8 is not a generalized statement but is the Christian family of the widow that is identified in v.4.

This verse, like the entire paragraph, I stress again is directed to the church, that is Christians. Notice how Paul says, “these should learn first of all to put their religion into practice by caring for their own family and so repaying their parents and grandparents, for this is pleasing to God.” This for Paul is nothing more and nothing less than obedience to the Ten Commandments, he cites it directly to the church in Ephesians (1 Timothy is written to the Ephesians as well) 6.2, “Honor your father and mother, which is the first commandment with a promise.” This is why Paul tells these Christians they have an obligation – because of their faith – to take care of the widow. They are honoring her.

Failing to care for the poor, the powerless, (widows/orphans/aliens) places these so called Believers in the same category as the Pagans. The Pagans frequently abandoned their elderly, they “exposed” their unwanted children who either starved to death or became enslaved in brothels and other unsavory places. God’s Family is NOT like that. Paul is not going to let that happen. So the believing family is the safety net for the widow.

In verses 5 and 6 Paul uses a trope to talk about two kinds of widows (who are like two ordinary people). One trusts in God and one lives for him/herself. The destitute widow who “trusts in God” will be cared for by God’s family. The church is now her family of the widow who either has no physical believing family or is abandoned by her family. That is if she has no believing family to care for her.

The line in v.6 is related to the wider problem in 1 Timothy of women influenced by the Goddess Artemis (whose massive temple was in Ephesus). Women, including younger widows” are “busybodies” going from “house to house” who are “saying/TEACHING” things they ought not as the apostle says in vv.13 but read from 11 to 15 (and this is directly related to what Paul says in that grossly taken out of context passage in chapter 2 of 1 Timothy). To read v.8 properly we need to read all of chapter 5.3-16 where he tells the younger widows to remarry (v.14).

Verse 8 is aimed directly at those Christian’s (identified in v.4) who have widows in their family but are refusing to take care of them. They are the one’s who are not putting their faith in practice. If we love our neighbor as ourselves, our first neighbor is our physical family. Again Paul says in Eph 6.2, they are to honor not just widows but mothers and fathers as the Ten Commandments say. Those Christians in Ephesus who are not taking care of their family – the widow – are worse than the pagans (unbelievers). They have denied the faith they claim to have embraced.

This text is not a general statement about unbelievers. It is directed to the church. A non-believer can never “deny the faith.” And be a nonbeliever cannot be “worse than an unbeliever!” They are in fact already a nonbeliever. So verse 8, like all of First Timothy is directed to people who have claimed to believe that Jesus is the King (Messiah).

The context is about how to take care of widows. To summarize:

1) younger widows (and these are Christian widows throughout) should get remarried. They can and should do this.

2) Older widows should have family that takes care of them. The family that does not take care of their family are in fact no better than the pagans in Ephesus because that is what the pagans do – abandon the weak and poor.

3) Those widows who have no one – that is believing family – to care for them – are to be dedicated to God. They ought to be learners as Paul says in chapter 2. They have trusted in God and will not be abandoned. Those who gather with the Ephesian church who refuse to care for their own family have denied the faith. The church, the “household of God” (i.e. family of God) will be the sons, daughters, brothers and sisters of the widow when her family (which is no real family) abandons her.

Read all of 1 Timothy 5.3-16. It is about the same thing (carrying for poor widows) and is a unit. Verse 8 is smack in the middle of this teaching on how to properly care for widows.

That is what 1 Timothy 5.8 is all about. If we love God then we will love our neighbor. In this case our neighbor is a widow in our family. And the church is that family for the widow who has no family.

Years ago I took a number of classes that were supposed to be of help in Christian apologetics. Every bachelor’s degree should require at least some exposure to history and philosophy but the class I had was called “Logic and the Bible.” Correct reasoning, as defined in various syllogisms, was the proper way of reading the Bible (it is not, exegesis and syllogisms are not the same thing).

Over the years, I have discerned great irony among some of my brothers and sisters. In an effort to establish their bona fide credentials they commit the most basic fallacies that we learn even in an introduction to Philosophy class. The three I see regularly are equivocation, special pleading and begging the question. The latter is especially prominent. Note this rather typical example,

“According to our progressive brethren, the way for the Lord’s church to grow is for it to surrender its biblical convictions concerning homosexuality, divorce and remarriage for just any reason, women preachers, the use of instrumental music in worship, belief in everlasting punishment in hell, its opposition to denominationalism, its conviction that the New Testament is the pattern which the church is to follow in all ages” (end quote)

This quotation is one extended logical fallacy, it is begging the question. What is the question? What is actually the “biblical” position on various topics. The writer simply assumes his position is correct and then condemns those who disagree with no effort given, nor expected from the Amen corner, to actually establish the correctness of whatever the biblical position may be on a given matter.

There is a “biblical conviction” regarding:

divorce/remarriage – his
women preaching – his
instrumental music – his
patternism – his

The writer has not established that his position is the “biblical conviction” in the slightest. But if you or I disagree with his fallacy then we are “progressive” and therefore do not actually take Scripture seriously. His position is simply assumed to be exactly and one hundred percent the “biblical conviction” without the slightest effort made to show that it is so.

The Bible’s conviction, not Bobby Valentine, disagrees with this brother’s question begging.

I do not grant his assumed conclusion as the “biblical conviction.” There is neither shadow nor turning in my own mind that the WHOLE BIBLE is inspired, authoritative, the unvarnished truth in all things that God leads us but I do not accept the fallacy of begging the question as a means of doing theology.

Grace and Grace in the Dead Sea Scrolls

It is a common view promoted in myriads of Protestant sermons that Jews of Jesus’s day thought they were working their way to salvation, that they had no understanding of grace, that their religion was devoid of genuine spirituality. This foil is used to preach certain passages in Paul, that Paul was miserable and desperately fleeing legalism.

There are massive problems with this picture. First, the people thinking like this do not read the Hebrew Bible where God’s Hesed/grace, mercy, forgiveness is the foundation of everything. Second, people thinking like this do not read the Apocrypha which has some of the finest proclamations on God’s grace and mercy to be found. And third, this point of view is demolished by all kinds of writings by Jews outside the canon of Scripture. I will share two marvelous texts found in the Dead Sea Scrolls: One from the Community Rule/Manual of Discipline and the other from the Hymns.

1) Manual of Discipline/Community Rule

“For mankind has no way, and man is unable to establish his steps
since justification is with God …
As for me, if I stumble, the mercies of God
shall be my eternal salvation.
If I stagger because of sin of flesh,
my justification shall be by the righteousness of God which endures forever.
When my distress is unleashed
He will deliver my soul from the Pit
and will direct my steps to the way.
He will draw me near by His grace,
and by His mercy will He bring my justification.
He will judge me in the righteousness of His truth
and in the greatness of His goodness
He will pardon all my sins.
Through His righteousness he will cleanse me
of the uncleanness of man
and of the sins of the children of men,
that I may confess to God His righteousness,
and His majesty to the Most High.
(Community Rule XI.11-15)

2) The Hymns

“As You have said by the hand of Moses,
You forgive transgression, iniquity, and sin,
and pardon rebellion and unfaithfulness”
(IV.10. This is almost a quotation of the God Creed in Exodus 34.6)

“Righteousness, I know, is not of man,
nor is perfection of way of the son of man [=way of humans] …
For I remember my sins
and the unfaithfulness of my fathers.
When the wicked rose against Your Covenant
and the condemned against Your word
I said in my sinfulness,
‘I am forsaken by Your Covenant.’ …
I lean on Your grace
and on the multitude of Your mercies,
for You will pardon iniquity,
and through Your righteousness
You will purify man of his sin.”
(XII.30-37)

Read these out loud. Here we have a window into the faith of pious Jews in Jesus’s day. Some of these passages in fact sound almost like Paul himself could have written them.

Sometimes we need some historical context to hear what Jesus and the New Testament writers were all about and what the real issues actually were.

Related Articles

Unbearable Burden? Did Jews (Paul) Believe the Torah was a “Burden?”

Prayer of Manasseh: Heartbeat of Jewish Spirituality

Ten Shocking Facts about the “Law” Your Preacher never Told You