Podcasts about mi baker academic

The amalgamation of concepts and ideas that comprise dispensationalism are surely considered in the various contentions with its theological framework, especially in discourse with covenant theology. Dispensationalism is a relatively new theological construct, not gaining legitimate and broad affirmation until the mid-nineteenth century.[1] Thomas Ice contends that dispensationalism is “a cluster of items joined together to form a system of thought.”[2] A variety of theological concepts, therefore, are combined to form the overarching contention of dispensationalism. This paper will provide a survey of dispensationalism's theological framework as well as offer a discourse from the perspective of covenant theology. The broad arguments of dispensationalism will be examined, and theological dissentions with dispensationalism will be engaged. With the term dispensationalism coined by Phillip Mauro,[3] the construction of dispensationalism holds a variety of supports, not the least of which is its view on the literal interpretation of Scripture. Here I will provide an analysis of the overarching concepts within dispensationalism including interpretation of Scripture, the distinction between Israel and the church, and typical dispensational divisions. Moreover, this paper will offer a survey of notable dispensationalists in church history. Finally, this paper will give a theological critique of dispensationalism and dissent from the perspective of a covenant theology. Although dispensationalism has seemingly diminished in recent decades,[4] it is still a prominent part of eschatological theology among Western (and primarily American) evangelicals. Thus, the theological arguments offered by dispensationalists must be considered by all (American) Christians, for surely such arguments will be encountered. [1] Craig Bloomberg and Sung Wook Chung, A Case for Historic Premillenialism: An Alternative to “Left Behind” Eschatology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009), 14. [2] Thomas D. Ice, “What Is Dispensationalism?” Liberty University Article Archives 71: 1. [3] Phillip Mauro, The Gospel of the Kingdom: With an Examination of Modern Dispensationalism (Hamilton Brothers Publishing, 1928) 17. [4] “‘The Rise and Fall of Dispensationalism'—A Conversation with Daniel Hummel About Dispensationalism in America and in the Evangelical Mind,” interview by Albert Mohler, Albert Mohler blog, August 23, 2023, https://albertmohler.com/2023/08/23/daniel-hummel/#:~:text=Yeah%2C%20and%20it's%20a%20story,an%20Antichrist%20and%20everything%20else.

In this episode, Kim talks to Dr. Cynthia Long Westfall. Dr. Westfall shares her background, providing context that helps explain her interest in the New Testament and Paul. Her mentors, service, analytical mind and questions led her into digging into the New Testament and Paul, and women's sexuality. She provides excellent context and interpretations of Paul's difficult passages. She specifically focuses on how Paul instructs the church to honor the traditionally discarded women with the Ancient Corinthain symbol of honorable women, the head covering.     00:00 Introduction to Mutuality Matters Podcast  00:24 Meet Dr. Cynthia Westfall  01:07 Cynthia's Journey to Faith and Scholarship  03:19 Struggles with Traditional Interpretations  07:07 Embracing Egalitarianism  15:01 Paul's Subversion of Cultural Norms  19:51 Introduction to the Topic  20:26 Traditional Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 11  21:22 Questioning Traditional Views  23:10 Alternate Interpretations Based on Veiling History  24:38 Cultural Significance of Veiling  26:55 Paul's True Intentions  28:54 Implications for Women in the Church  34:51 Order in Worship Services  37:17 Conclusion and Final Thoughts    Guest Bio    Dr. Cynthia Long Westfall is associate professor of New Testament and has been at McMaster Divinity College since 2005, teaching courses in New Testament with a specialization in the book of Hebrews, Greek exegesis, biblical interpretation, intertextuality, women in ministry, biblical social justice and welcoming the other, courses which are devoted to a commitment to transformation by God's word through its application to all aspects of life and ministry. Dr. Westfall has a constellation of research interests that are focused on issues concerned with the New Testament and its interpretation with contemporary methodologies and its translation. She places a special focus on texts and issues that have been traditionally overlooked. She has a priority of mentoring academic and professional students as well as others. Her ministry experience includes campus ministry, ministry to the urban community, support of the immigrant community in the US and Canada and the support of women pursuing God's call on their lives.  She currently serves on the board of Canadian Baptist Missions (CBM). She has served as chair of the board of Wentworth Baptist Church in Hamilton, ON, and continues to serve the church is various ways including preaching, consulting and serving as a delegate as well as speaking and teaching in the churches, organizations and assembly of the Canadian Baptists of Ontario and Quebec (CBOQ).  Dr. Cynthia Long Westfall is professor of New Testament at McMaster Divinity College in Canada.    Resources by Dr. Westfall Cynthia Long Westfall. Paul and Gender: Reclaiming the Apostle's Vision for Men and Women in Christ (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic). 2016.  Mutuality Matters podcast: Redeeming Paul - Part 1, Redeeming Paul - Part 2  Mutuality Magazine: Difficult Passages in the Bible and How to Understand Them  Priscilla Papers: On Developing a Consistent Hermeneutical Approach to the Application of General Scriptures    CBE International Conference Audios:   Paul and Gender: Highlights and Bombshells   The Symbol of the Veil in the Ancient Near East and Today: Subjugation or Honor - Part 1   The Symbol of the Veil in the Ancient Near East and Today: Subjugation or Honor? Part 2  In Church or at Home? What is 1 Timothy 2:8-15 Really About?  Answering Those Who Ask: Moving from Defense to a Breakthrough    Relevant Resources   Roy Ciampa was mentioned in the interview explaining the educational level of women in the New Testament Church his podcast interview with Dr. Mimi Hadad in Women and Words: Marriage in the Greco-Roman World in Translation with Dr. Rogy Ciampa  Dr. Westfall references Kenneth Baily's book about women in the Middle East. See Cynthia Long Westfall's review of his book: Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes  Veil Bound or Veiled Beauty? By Kay Blevins Calabrese    Disclaimer   The opinions expressed in CBE's Mutuality Matters' podcast are those of its hosts or guests do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of CBE International or its members or chapters worldwide. The designations employed in this podcast and the presentation of content therein do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of CBE concerning the legal status of any country, area or territory or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers.  

In the 335th episode of Expositors Collective, Mike sits down with Pastor Craig Babcock to discuss the unique challenges and opportunities of preaching through the book of Proverbs in an expositional manner. Both seasoned and novice preachers often find Proverbs challenging to preach (and Mike is no exception!) However, Craig, drawing from his PhD research, shares a transformative perspective on the book. Instead of viewing Proverbs as a collection of isolated maxims, Craig presents it as a progressive journey through a life—gaining knowledge and wisdom, being taught, and eventually becoming a teacher. This fresh understanding can be incredibly valuable for anyone looking to preach through Proverbs or simply wanting to deepen their grasp of this profound biblical book. In addition to this, the conversation delves into raising up the next generation of Bible teachers, offering solid insights and practical advice. And, for a bit of fun, Craig shares the unexpected benefits that come from wearing a suit and tie. Whether you're a preacher, a student of the Bible, or just curious about Proverbs, you're sure to enjoy this engaging and informative discussion. Craig Babcock attended Oregon State University and received a B.S. in Anthropology. He also holds an M.A. in Biblical Studies from Calvary Chapel University. Currently, Craig is a Doctoral Candidate at Liberty University in pursuit of a Ph.D. in Biblical Exposition. Pastor Craig has a heart for the local church and the Lord's people. Growing up in South Denver, Craig has spent the last 15 years of ministry as a pastor, church planter, and coach. Prior to being called into the ministry, Craig served in the Navy and in Law Enforcement. Craig's central focus of teaching is the Word of God and allowing the Lord to work in the lives of those who trust in Christ. Craig married his wonderful wife Christy in 2002, and they have three children. Craig enjoys running, being outdoors, and going on adventures. Resources for Proverbs -  Ansberry, Christopher B. Be Wise, My Son, and Make My Heart Glad an Exploration of the Courtly Nature of the Book of Proverbs. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011. Bartholomew, Craig, and Ryan O'Dowd. Old Testament Wisdom Literature: a Theological Introduction. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2011. Clements, Ronald E. Proverbs. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2019. Crenshaw, James L. Old Testament Wisdom: an Introduction. Third edition. Louisville, Ky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2010. Fox, Michael V. Proverbs: an Eclectic Edition with Introduction and Textual Commentary. Atlanta, GA: SBL Press, 2015. Gane, Roy. Old Testament Law for Christians : Original Context and Enduring Application. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group, 2017. von Rad, Gerhard. Wisdom in Israel. Translated by Mark D. Petering. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania: Trinity Press International, 1972. Waltke, Bruce K., and Ivan D. V. De Silva. Proverbs A Shorter Commentary. Chicago: Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2021. Witherington, Ben. Jesus the Sage: the Pilgrimage of Wisdom. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994. CLICK HERE to give to the Uganda Expositors Collective Conference The Expositors Collective podcast is part of the CGNMedia, Working together to proclaim the Gospel, make disciples, and plant churches. For more content like this, visit https://cgnmedia.org/ Join our private Facebook group to continue the conversation: https://www.facebook.com/groups/ExpositorsCollective Click here to support Expositors Collective

Election      Election derives from the Greek verb eklegō (ἐκλέγω) which, according to BDAG, means “to make a choice in accordance with significant preference, select someone or something for oneself.”[1] According to Norman Geisler, “The word election (or elect) occurs fourteen times in the New Testament. An elect person is a chosen one; election (or elect) is used of Israel (Rom 9:11; 11:28), of angels (1 Tim 5:21), and of believers. In relation to believers, election is the decision of God from all eternity whereby He chose those who would be saved.”[2] Geisler further states, “The words chosen and chose are used numerous times. The terms are employed of Christ (Luke 23:35; 1 Pet 1:20; 2:4, 6), of a disciple (Acts 1:2, 24; 10:41; 22:14; John 15:10), and even of Judas (John 6:70; 13:18), who was chosen to be an apostle. Soteriologically, a chosen one is a person elected to salvation by God.”[3]      Election is that free choice of God from eternity past in which He chose to save and bless some (Eph 1:4-5). The elect are the ones chosen. God elects groups (Luke 6:13-16; John 6:70) and individuals (1 Ch 28:5; Acts 9:15). Election is to salvation (Acts 13:48; Eph 1:4-6; 2 Th 2:13), spiritual blessing (Eph 1:3), holy and righteous living (Col 3:12; 1 Pet 2:9), and service for the Lord (Jer 1:4-5; Gal 1:15-16; cf. Acts 9:15). In election, God is sovereign and people are free. Both are true. This is why Jesus said, “All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out” (John 6:37). Here we observe the coalescence of God's sovereignty and positive human volition as the Father gives and people come of their own choice.[4] We observe something similar in Acts where Luke wrote, “When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed” (Acts 13:48). Here we observe Gentiles who were appointed to eternal life, and that they personally exercised their volition and believed in the Lord for salvation.[5] Robert B. Thieme Jr., states: "[Election is] the recognition by God, before the foundation of the world, of those who would believe in Christ; the sovereign act of God in eternity past to choose, to set apart, certain members of the human race for privilege, based on His knowledge of every person's freewill decisions in time. While God is sovereign, having the right to do with His creatures as He pleases, never has He hindered or tampered with human free will. He did not choose some to be saved and others to be condemned. Instead, in eternity past, God first chose to accomplish the work of man's salvation through the Son. Then, He looked down the corridors of time and elected for salvation everyone He knew would believe in Jesus Christ (Eph 1:4). God elected believers in the sense that He knew ahead of time that their free will would choose for Christ….Moreover, God did not elect anyone to hell: unbelievers are condemned to eternally reside in hell only because they have used their volition toward unbelief (John 3:18)."[6] Predestined by God      When writing to the Christians at Ephesus, Paul said, “He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will” (Eph 1:4-5). The word predestined translates the Greek word proorizō (προορίζω), which means, to “decide upon beforehand,  predetermine.”[7] Harold Hoehner defines the word similarly as, “to determine beforehand, mark out beforehand, predestine.”[8] Geisler notes, “Just as God predetermined from all eternity that Christ would die for our sins (Acts 2:23), He also predestined who would be saved. As Paul says, ‘Those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son' (Rom 8:29).”[9] According to Paul Enns, “Even though election and predestination are clearly taught in Scripture, man is still held accountable for his choices. Scripture never suggests that man is lost because he is not elect or has not been predestined; the emphasis of Scripture is that man is lost because he refuses to believe the gospel.”[10]      Predestination refers to what God purposes for us. The Bible reveals that God has predestined us to adoption as His children (Eph 1:5), to our ultimate conformity to Christ (Rom 8:29–30), and to the blessings of our future inheritance (Eph 1:11). Warren Wiersbe states, “This word, as it is used in the Bible, refers primarily to what God does for saved people. Nowhere in the Bible are we taught that people are predestined to hell, because this word refers only to God's people. Election seems to refer to people, while predestination refers to purposes.”[11] According to Robert B. Thieme Jr., predestination refers to “God's predetermined, sovereign provisioning of every believer for the purpose of executing His plan, purpose, and will in time (Eph 1:4-6, 11).”[12] Thieme further states: "In eternity past God decreed, or established with certainty, the believer's destiny for time and eternity. However, the divine act of predestination is never to be confused with the ideas of kismet [the idea of fate] or any other human-viewpoint system of fatalism. God did not negate free will or force anyone into a course of action. Rather, He only decreed and provisioned what He knew would actually happen. He predestined believers based on His eternal knowledge that they would, by their own free will, accept Jesus Christ as Savior. Long before human history began, sovereign God determined that every Church Age believer would be united with the resurrected Jesus Christ, the King of kings. Those who believe are predestined as heirs of God and joint heirs with the Son of God—sharing the eternal destiny of Jesus Christ Himself (Eph 1:5). Furthermore, God predestined believers with everything necessary to fulfill His plan in time. No Christian is dependent upon human energy, personality, or human effort, because God established a grace way of life and furnished the divine means of execution (2 Tim 1:9). Every believer in this age has equal opportunity to either accept or reject God's predestined provision. Regardless of personal failure or success in time, all believers are predestined to be completely “conformed to the image of His Son” in resurrection bodies in heaven (Rom 8:29)."[13] Foreknowledge      Peter wrote of God's elect as those “who are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father” (1 Pet 1:1-2). Here, the word foreknowledge translates the Greek noun prognōsis (πρόγνωσις), which means “to know beforehand, know in advance”[14] Foreknowledge simply means that omniscient God, from eternity past, knew in advance all that would happen in time and space, and He knew the actions of every person and whether they would be saved or not. Jesus communicated His foreknowledge when He said to His disciples, ‘“There are some of you who do not believe.' For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him” (John 6:64). God also knew His own actions in time and space, either to direct, permit, or overrule human or angelic decisions, and to judge everyone fairly for their actions. According to Norman Geisler: "Being omniscient, God also eternally foreknew those who would be saved: “Those God foreknew he also predestined” (Rom 8:29). Indeed, they were “elect according to the foreknowledge of God” (1 Pet 1:2). Since His foreknowledge is infallible (He is omniscient), whatever God foreknows will indeed come to pass. Hence, His foreknowledge of who would be saved assures that they will be."[15]      In his letter to the Romans, Paul wrote, “For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son” (Rom 8:29). The word “foreknew” translates the Greek verb proginōskō (προγινώσκω) which, according to BDAG, means “to know beforehand or in advance, have foreknowledge.”[16] Here, the word connotes God's knowing people in an intimate sense and not merely what they will do. This speaks to the richness of the relationship God has with each individual. Though we exist in time and space and live our lives in a chronological manner with one experience sequentially following the next, God exists in the eternal realm, beyond time and space, in the eternal now. This means that God is present at all times and places in human history simultaneously. Scripture speaks of what God foreknew from eternity past as it relates to the choices of His elect, but His foreknowledge is not detached or impersonal; rather, it is intimately connected to the formation of His family and the execution of His purposes in the world (see Jer 1:4-5). Prevenient Grace      Prevenient grace refers to the grace of God that precedes and prepares a person's heart and will for salvation. The term “prevenient” means “preceding” or “coming before.” According to Geisler, “Prevenient means ‘before,' and prevenient grace refers to God's unmerited work in the human heart prior to salvation, which directs people to this end through Christ…This grace is also seen in the fact that ‘the goodness of God leads you to repentance' (Rom 2:4). Thus, prevenient grace is God's grace exerted on our behalf even before He bestows salvation on us.”[17]      Because God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2:4), and is “not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance” (2 Pet 3:9), He works in a preparatory manner to convince the fallen human heart to welcome Christ (2 Tim 1:9). Jesus spoke of the role of the Holy Spirit in the dispensation of the church age, saying, “And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment; concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me” (John 16:8-9). According to Geisler, “The act of convicting, then, is that by which God persuades a person that he is a sinner and, thus, is in need of the Savior.”[18] This prevenient work of God is necessary because of the sinfulness of mankind. It is not considered to be salvific in itself but rather a preparatory grace that allows individuals to cooperate with God's saving work in Christ. In this perspective, salvation is seen as a cooperative process where individuals have the ability to accept or reject God's offer of grace. Christians are Elect in Christ      From eternity past, God intended for His grand plan of salvation for all humanity to be achieved through His Son. Scripture reveals “the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world” (1 John 4:14), and “the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10), and He is “the Lamb who has been slain” from the foundation of the world (Rev 13:8). Jesus is the Father's Chosen One. God said, “Behold, My Servant, whom I uphold; My chosen One in whom My soul delights” (Isa 42:1). And He said of Jesus, “This is My Son, My Chosen One” (Luke 9:35). And Peter describes Jesus as “chosen and precious in the sight of God” (1 Pet 2:4). Jesus was chosen by God before the foundation of the world to be the Savior of all mankind, and Christians are elect because we are in Christ. Geisler states: "Christ is eternal, and the universal church was chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4); hence, in the mind of God, the church of God is eternal. Further, Christ is the elect of God (Matt 3:16–17), and we are elect in Him; not only is Christ the elect One, but in the New Testament those “in Christ,” the church, the members of His body, were elect in Him before time began."[19]      Scripture reveals that Christians “are chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father” (1 Pet 1:1-2), that Christ “was foreknown before the foundation of the world” (1 Pet 1:20), was “chosen and precious” in His sight (1 Pet 2:4), and that God “chose us in Him before the foundation of the world” (Eph 1:4). The prepositional phrase “in Him” (ἐν αὐτῷ) speaks to our election and union with Christ (Eph 1:4). According to L. B. Smedes, “This strongly suggests that God elects people for salvation in the same decision that He elected Christ as their Savior.”[20] Because Jesus is God's Chosen One, it is asserted that we, God's elect, were chosen at the same time as Christ, and He “saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity” (2 Tim 1:9). When we believed in Jesus as our Savior, God placed us into union with Christ, for “by His doing you are in Christ Jesus” (1 Cor 1:30). Paul wrote, “I endure all things for the sake of those who are chosen [eklektos], so that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus and with it eternal glory” (2 Tim 2:10).      The prepositional phrase, “in Christ” (ἐν Χριστῷ), emphasizes the idea of believers being in union with Christ. This union is not merely a metaphorical expression but signifies a profound spiritual reality. The Apostle Paul frequently uses this expression to convey the intimate and transformative relationship that believers have with Christ (Rom 8:1; 12:5; 1 Cor 1:2, 30; Gal 3:28; Eph 1:3-4; Phil 1:1; Col 1:2; 2 Tim 1:9; 2:10). Being “in Christ” signifies that believers are, in a real spiritual sense, united with Him. This identification includes sharing in His death, burial, and resurrection, for we have been “crucified with Christ” (Gal 2:20), and “we died with Christ” (Rom 6:8), were “buried with Him” (Rom 6:4), and “have been raised up with Christ” (Col 3:1). In a real way, we were with Him on the cross, in the grave, and at His resurrection. In the eyes of God, His experience has become our experience. This identification with Jesus is real, even though we were not physically alive at the time of His crucifixion, burial, resurrection, or ascension into heaven. Furthermore, “In Him we have…forgiveness of our trespasses” (Eph 1:7), “have been sanctified in Christ Jesus” (1 Cor 1:2), have “eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 6:23), and are told there is “no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom 8:1). This kind of identification in and with another is true in other instances. For example, it was said of Rebekah, “Two nations are in your womb” (Gen 25:23), even before Israel was called into being as a nation. Similarly, the writer of Hebrews speaks of Levi who “paid tithes” (Heb 7:9), and this while “he was still in the loins of his father” Abraham (Heb 7:10). This means that Levi paid tithes to Melchizedek, even before he existed, as he was in the loins of his father, Abraham.[21]      Furthermore, being “in Christ” reflects a believer's new position before God. It signifies that, through faith in Christ, believers are accepted and justified before God. Their sins are forgiven (Acts 10:43; Eph 1:7), and they are seen through the righteousness of Christ (2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9). The phrase also emphasizes that believers participate in the benefits of Christ's redemptive work. This includes reconciliation with God (Rom 5:10), adoption as children (Gal 4:5; Eph 1:5), the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 3:16), and the status of being a new creation in Christ (2 Cor 5:17). Believers are seen as co-heirs with Christ, sharing in the inheritance of eternal life (Eph 1:3-14; Rom 8:17). This positional truth is foundational to the concept of salvation by grace through faith. While being “in Christ” has personal implications, it also has a corporate dimension. It speaks to the collective identity of the Church as the body of Christ, with believers being interconnected and sharing a common life “in Christ.” Robert B. Thieme Jr., states: "Through the baptism of the Spirit at salvation, every believer of this age is removed from his position in Adam and secured in his position “in Christ” (1 Cor 15:22; Eph 2:5–6; cf. Gal 3:27). The believer, no longer spiritually dead, is made a “new creature” with a totally unprecedented relationship with God (2 Cor 5:17a). The “old things” that once kept him alienated from God have passed away; phenomenal “new things” have come by virtue of his position in Christ (2 Cor 5:17b). The believer shares Christ's eternal life (1 John 5:11–12), His righteousness (2 Cor 5:21), His election (Eph 1:3–4), His destiny (Eph 1:5), His sonship (John 1:12; Gal 3:26; 1 John 3:1–2), His heirship (Rom 8:16–17), His sanctification (1 Cor 1:2, 30), His kingdom (2 Pet 1:11), His priesthood (Heb 10:10–14), and His royalty (2 Tim 2:11–12). This new position can never be forfeited."[22]      In summary, the prepositional phrase “in Christ” encapsulates profound theological truths about the believer's union with Christ, identification with His redemptive work, a new positional standing before God, and the communal identity of the Church as the body of Christ. It serves as a key concept in understanding the richness of Christian salvation and the transformative impact of faith in Jesus Christ. Dr. Steven R. Cook   [1] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 305. [2] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three: Sin, Salvation (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2004), 220–221. [3] Ibid., 221. [4] Other passages that emphasize God's sovereign choice: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day” (John 6:44), and “no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father” (John 6:65). Paul wrote, “He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will” (Eph 1:4-5). And to Christians living in Thessalonica, Paul wrote, “We should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth” (2 Th 2:13). [5] Romans 9:1-18 is often cited when discussing election to salvation; however, when one looks at the context of Roman 9, it does not pertain to salvation, but to God's selection of the progenitors of the nation of Israel. In a similar way, God sovereignly selected Nebuchadnezzar to be the king over Babylon (Dan 2:37-38; 5:18), and Cyrus as king over Persia (Ezra 1:2). In fact, God's sovereignty is supreme when it comes to selecting all human rulers, for “It is He who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings” (Dan 2:21), and “the Most High is ruler over the realm of mankind, and bestows it on whom He wishes and sets over it the lowliest of men” (Dan 4:17). At times, He even raises up young foolish kings to discipline His people, as He told Isaiah the prophet, “I will make mere lads their princes, and capricious children will rule over them” (Isa 3:4). [6] Robert B. Thieme, Jr. “Election”, Thieme's Bible Doctrine Dictionary, (Houston, TX., R. B. Thieme, Jr., Bible Ministries, 2022), 81. [7] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 873. [8] Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 193. [9] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three: Sin, Salvation, 221. [10] Paul P. Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1989), 329. [11] Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1996), 11. [12] Robert B. Thieme, Jr. “Predestination”, Thieme's Bible Doctrine Dictionary, 203. [13] Ibid., 203-204 [14] Moisés Silva, ed., New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology and Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2014), 138. [15] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three: Sin, Salvation, 221. [16] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 866. [17] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three: Sin, Salvation, 222. [18] Ibid., 222. [19] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Four: Church, Last Things, 50–51. [20] L. B. Smedes, “Grace,” ed. Geoffrey W Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988), 551. [21] These two analogies with Rebekah and Levi help convey the idea of a connection or representation that transcends mere physical existence. In the case of Rebekah, the passage refers to the statement, “Two nations are in your womb” (Gen 25:23), highlighting that this declaration occurred before Israel was called into being as a nation. This serves as an example of a connection that existed before the actual historical formation of the nation. Likewise, the reference to Levi paying tithes while still in the loins of his father, Abraham (Heb 7:9-10), is another analogy used to illustrate a connection that goes beyond the immediate physical existence of the individual. It suggests a representation or identification that precedes the individual's own existence. [22] Robert B. Thieme, Jr. “Position in Christ”, Thieme's Bible Doctrine Dictionary, 200.

     The Bible reveals God is holy.[1] God declares of Himself, “I am holy” (Lev 11:44), and the psalmist says, “holy is the LORD our God” (Psa 99:9), and the Seraphim declare, “Holy, Holy, Holy, is the LORD of hosts” (Isa 6:3). In these verses, the word “holy” translates the Hebrew word qadōsh (קָדוֹשׁ), which means “to be holy, [or] separated.”[2] James Swanson says it refers “to being unique and pure in the sense of superior moral qualities and possessing certain essential divine qualities in contrast with what is human.”[3] God's holiness is closely linked with His righteousness, justice, and perfection. Holiness denotes moral purity.      Because God is absolutely holy (Psa 99:9; Isa 6:3; Rev 15:4), it is written, “no evil dwells with You” (Psa 5:4). By definition, evil is “any act or event that is contrary to the good and holy purposes of God…Moral evil refers to acts (sins) of creatures that are contrary to God's holy character and law.”[4] According to Merrill F. Unger, moral evil “is the failure of rational and free beings to conform in character and conduct to the will of God.”[5]George Howley states, “God is separate from all evil and is in no way responsible for it…[and] It can only be attributed to the abuse of free-will on the part of created beings, angelic and human.”[6] Evil originates in the heart (Gen 6:5; Zech 8:17), can result in evil actions (Neh 13:17; Prov 24:8; 1 Pet 3:12), lead to proneness of evil (Ex 32:22; Deut 9:24), and mark an entire generation of people (Deut 1:35; Matt 12:45).      Being holy means God cannot be affixed to anything morally imperfect. This means the Lord cannot condone sin in any way. Scripture reveals, “Your eyes are too pure to approve evil, and You cannot look on wickedness with favor” (Hab 1:13), and “God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). Everett Harrison states: "The basic idea conveyed by the holiness of God is His separateness, i.e., His uniqueness, His distinction as the Wholly Other, the One who cannot be confused with the gods devised by men (Ex 15:11), the One who stands apart from and above the creation. Secondarily the holiness of God denotes His moral perfection, His absolute freedom from blemish of any kind (Psa 89:35)."[7]      The third Person of the Trinity bears the specific title of the Holy Spirit (John 14:26), which emphasizes His righteousness and separateness from sin (Isa 63:10; Eph 4:30). Jesus, as the Son of God, embodies the holiness of God in human form. Scripture tells us that Jesus was “holy, innocent, pure, and set apart from sinners” (Heb 7:26). Jesus lived and interacted with sinners (i.e., eating with them, attending weddings, etc.), but He never had sinful thoughts, spoke sinful words, or acted in sinful ways. No matter what was happening around Him, Jesus never crossed the line into sin. Without abandoning righteousness, He loved and spoke truth, displayed compassion, helped the weak, and rebuked the arrogant. He was always holy in thought, word, and deed, and though near to others, He was still “set apart from sinners” (Heb 7:26).      In one sense, a person or group is holy—set apart to God—simply by being part of the covenant community. It was said of Israel, “all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the LORD is in their midst” (Num 16:3). According to Allen Ross, “They were holy, because the Lord who set them apart was holy.”[8] Merrill F. Unger notes, “God has dedicated Israel as His people. They are ‘holy' by their relationship to the ‘holy' God. All of the people are in a sense ‘holy,' as members of the covenant community, irrespective of their faith and obedience.”[9] Being set apart to God, the Lord expected His people to be set apart from the world and behave in conformity with His righteous character and directives. Unger states, “Based on the intimate nature of the relationship, God expected His people to live up to His ‘holy' expectations and, thus, to demonstrate that they were a ‘holy nation.'”[10] The Lord told His people, “you are to be holy to Me, for I the LORD am holy; and I have set you apart from the peoples to be Mine” (Lev 20:26). According to Allen Ross, “The means of developing holiness required faith and obedience on their part. But because it was a nation of very human and often stubborn individuals, progression toward holiness did not develop instantly or easily, and for some it did not develop at all.”[11]      This is also true of Christians who are called “saints”, not because we act saintly, but because of our relation to God as part of the church, the body of Christ. Paul wrote to the church at Corinth, “to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling” (1 Cor 1:2). The word “saints” here translates the Greek hagios (ἅγιος), which pertains “to being dedicated or consecrated to the service of God.”[12] In this passage, hagios is a synonym for a believer in Christ, not a description of their character. All Christians are saints (Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:1-2; 2 Cor 1:1; Eph 1:1; Phil 1:1; Col 1:2). The Christians at Corinth were saints (positionally), even when they were behaving like mere men (1 Cor 3:1-3). Warren Wiersbe states: "The church is made up of saints, that is, people who have been “sanctified” or “set apart” by God. A saint is not a dead person who has been honored by men because of his or her holy life. No, Paul wrote to living saints, people who, through faith in Jesus Christ, had been set apart for God's special enjoyment and use. In other words, every true believer is a saint because every true believer has been set apart by God and for God."[13]      Christians living in the dispensation of the church age are called to holy living. Peter wrote, “like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; because it is written, ‘you shall be holy, for I am holy'” (1 Pet 1:15-16). God, who is our Father, is holy, and He calls for His children to live holy lives. For Christians, living holy to the Lord is accomplished by advancing to spiritual maturity and living as obedient-to-the-Word believers (Heb 6:1). It means learning God's Word (Psa 1:2-3; Ezra 7:10; 2 Tim 2:15; 3:16-17; 1 Pet 2:2), living in submission to Him (Rom 12:1-2; Jam 4:7), walking by faith (2 Cor 5:7; Heb 10:38; 11:6), being filled with the Spirit (Eph 5:18), walking by means of the Spirit (Gal 5:16), accepting trials that help us grow (Jam 1:2-4), being devoted to prayer (Col 4:2; 1 Th 5:17; Eph 6:18), worship (Heb 13:15), being thankful (1 Th 5:18), fellowshipping with other believers (Heb 10:24-25), serving others (Gal 5:13; 6:10; 1 Pet 4:10; Phil 2:3-4), and taking advantage of the time we have (Eph 5:15-16). On the negative side, it means not loving the world (Jam 4:4; 1 John 2:15-16), nor quenching the Spirit (1 Th 5:19), nor grieving the Spirit (Eph 4:30). If we turn to sin—and that's always a possibility—it means we are not living holy lives as God expects. When Christians sin, it does not result in loss of salvation, but loss of fellowship with God. It also means that if we continue to live sinfully, that God may discipline us (Heb 12:5-11), and deny us eternal rewards (1 Cor 3:10-15; 2 John 1:8). Humble believers acknowledge their sin, and God restores them to fellowship when they confess it to Him, seeking His forgiveness (1 John 1:9). Dr. Steven R. Cook   [1] The apostle Paul referred to the Bible as “the holy Scriptures” (Rom 1:2), and “the sacred writings” (2 Tim 3:15). The terms “holy” and “sacred” mean the Bible is a special book in that it conveys divine revelation from God to mankind (2 Tim 3:16-17). Though written by human authors under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit (2 Pet 1:20-21), the end product is “the word of God, which performs its work in you who believe” (1 Th 2:13). [2] Willem VanGemeren, ed., New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1997), 868. [3] James Swanson, “קָדוֹשׁ”, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains : Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997). [4] Stanley Grenz, David Guretzki, and Cherith Fee Nordling, Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1999), 48. [5] Merrill Frederick Unger, R. K. Harrison, Howard Frederic Vos, et al., The New Unger's Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988). [6] George Howley, “Evil,” ed. D. R. W. Wood et al., New Bible Dictionary (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 349. [7] Everett. F. Harrison, “Holiness; Holy,” ed. Geoffrey W Bromiley, The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988), 725. [8] Allen P. Ross, Holiness to the Lord: A Guide to the Exposition of the Book of Leviticus (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 378. [9] W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996), 113. [10] Ibid., 113. [11] Allen P. Ross, Holiness to the Lord: A Guide to the Exposition of the Book of Leviticus, 48. [12] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 10. [13] Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 1, 568.

In which I talk about Ash Wednesday as a re-formation of creaturely identity. Bibliography: Anglican Church in North America. The Book of Common Prayer. Huntington Beach, CA: Anglican Liturgy Press, 2019. Augustine. Confessions. Translated by Sarah Ruden. New York: The Modern Library, 2017. Brueggemann, Walter. “Remember, You are Dust.” Journal for Preachers 14, no. 2 (Lent 1991): 3-10. Accessed April 1, 2023. Atla Religion Database. Chittister, Sister Joan. The Liturgical Year. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2009. Clark, John C. and Marcus Peter Johnson. A Call to Christian Formation: How Theology Makes Sense of Our World. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2021. Smith, James K. A. Desiring the Kingdom: Worship, Worldview, and Cultural Formation. Vol. 1 of Cultural Liturgies. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009. ———. Imagining the Kingdom: How Worship Works. Vol. 2 of Cultural Liturgies. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013. Wells, David F. God in the Wastelands: The Reality of Truth in a World of Fading Dreams. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1994. ———. No Place for Truth: Or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993. Beneath The Willow Tree is a podcast dedicated to the pursuit of Truth through wisdom and imagination. Join host Sophie Burkhardt as she, fuelled by wonder and a quest for the beautiful, explores philosophy, theology, the arts and all things worthy of thought beneath the willow tree. If you might ever be interested in talking about any such things, or a specific book or movie, etc. please reach out to me at sdburkhardt321@gmail.com

     Jesus' substitutionary death on the cross is the basis for our forgiveness of sins. Scripture reveals, “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace” (Eph 1:7). Forgiveness translates the Greek word aphesis (ἄφεσις), which, according to BDAG, refers to “the act of freeing from an obligation, guilt, or punishment, pardon, cancellation.”[1] It means releasing someone from a debt they cannot pay. Paul wrote that God has “forgiven us all our transgressions, having erased the certificate of debt, with its obligations, that was against us and opposed to us, and has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the cross” (Col 2:13b-14). In Colossians 2:13, the word forgiveness translates the Greek word charizomai (χαρίζομαι), which means, “to show oneself gracious by forgiving wrongdoing, forgive, pardon.”[2] This reveals the loving and gracious heart of God toward lost sinners, for whom Christ died (Rom 5:8). Warren Wiersbe states, “When He shed His blood for sinners, Jesus Christ canceled the huge debt that was against sinners because of their disobedience to God's holy Law…In this way His Son paid the full debt when He died on the cross.”[3] According to Norman Geisler: "The Greek word for forgiveness is aphesis, which means “to forgive” or “to remit” one's sins. Hebrews declares that God cannot forgive without atonement, for “the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Heb 9:22). Paul announced: “Through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you” (Acts 13:38). Forgiveness does not erase the sin; history cannot be changed. But forgiveness does erase the record of the sin. Like a pardon, the crime of the accused is not expunged from history but is deleted from his account. Hence, it is “in [Christ Jesus that] we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace” (Eph 1:7; cf. Col 1:14)."[4] Paul Enns adds: "Forgiveness is the legal act of God whereby He removes the charges that were held against the sinner because proper satisfaction or atonement for those sins has been made. There are several Greek words used to describe forgiveness. One is charizomai, which is related to the word grace and means “to forgive out of grace.” It is used of cancellation of a debt (Col 2:13). The context emphasizes that our debts were nailed to the cross, with Christ's atonement freely forgiving the sins that were charged against us. The most common word for forgiveness is aphiemi, which means “to let go, release” or “send away.” The noun form is used in Ephesians 1:7 where it stresses the believer's sins have been forgiven or sent away because of the riches of God's grace as revealed in the death of Christ. Forgiveness forever solves the problem of sin in the believer's life—all sins past, present, and future (Col 2:13). This is distinct from the daily cleansing from sin that is necessary to maintain fellowship with God (1 John 1:9). Forgiveness is manward; man had sinned and needed to have his sins dealt with and removed."[5]      Under the OT system of sacrifices, we are told, “in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed” (Rom 3:25). The animal sacrifices did not remove sin. It was a temporary arrangement whereby God “passed over” the sins of His people until the time when Christ would come and die for the sins of the world. Concerning Romans 3:25, Hoehner states this “has the idea of a temporary suspension of punishment for sins committed before the cross, whereas ἄφεσις is the permanent cancellation of or release from the punishment for sin because it has been paid for by Christ's sacrifice.”[6] Merrill F. Unger adds: "The great foundational truth respecting the believer in relationship to his sins is the fact that his salvation comprehends the forgiveness of all his trespasses past, present, and future so far as condemnation is concerned (Rom 8:1; Col 2:13; John 3:18; 5:24). Since Christ has vicariously borne all sin and since the believer's standing in Christ is complete, he is perfected forever in Christ. When a believer sins, he is subject to chastisement from the Father but never to condemnation with the world (1 Cor 11:31–32)."[7]      Though Christ died for everyone (Heb 2:9; 1 John 2:2), the benefit of forgiveness is available only to those who trust in Him as Savior. Thiessen notes, “The death of Christ made forgiveness possible, but not necessary, since Christ died voluntarily…God is still entitled to say on what conditions man may receive forgiveness.”[8] Judicial forgiveness of sins is available to all, but each person must exercise their own volition and turn to Christ, and Christ alone, for salvation. The record of Scripture is that “there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12), and “everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins” (Acts 10:43). Familial Forgiveness of Sins      From the moment of our spiritual birth until we leave this world for heaven, we are in Christ and all our sins are judicially forgiven (Eph 2:5-6; Col 2:13). In addition, we have a new spiritual nature (2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:15), and the power to live righteously in God's will (Rom 6:11-14). However, during our time in this world, we still possess a sin nature (Rom 7:14-25; Gal 5:17), and occasionally yield to temptation (both internal and external) and commit sin. According to William MacDonald, “Conversion does not mean the eradication of the sin nature. Rather it means the implanting of the new, divine nature, with power to live victoriously over indwelling sin.”[9] Our acts of sin do not jeopardize our eternal salvation which was secured by the Lord Jesus Christ (John 10:28), but is does hurt our walk with the Lord (1 John 1:5-10), and stifles the work of the Holy Spirit who dwells within us (1 Cor 3:16; Eph 4:30; 1 Th 5:19). Though we try to keep our sins small and few, the reality is that we continue to sin, and some days more than others. As we grow spiritually in our knowledge of God's Word, we will pursue righteousness more and more and sin will diminish, but sin will never completely disappear from our lives. Living in the reality of God's Word, we know three things are true when we sin.      First, there is no condemnation (Rom 8:1). Though we have sinned against God, our eternal security and righteous standing before Him is never jeopardized. We are eternally secure (John 10:28), and continue to possess the righteousness of God that was imputed to us at the moment of salvation (Rom 4:1-5; 2 Cor 5:21; Phil 3:9).      Second, we have broken fellowship with God (1 John 1:5-6). When we sin, as a Christian, we have broken fellowship with God and stifled the work of the Holy Spirit who dwells within us (1 John 1:5-6; Eph 4:30; 1 Th 5:19). If we continue in sin, or leave our sin unconfessed, we are in real danger of divine discipline from God (Psa 32:3-4; Heb 12:5-11; 1 John 5:16-17; cf. Dan 4:37), which can eventuate in physical death (1 John 5:16; cf., Lev 10:1-2; Acts 5:3-5).      Third, if we confess our sin to God, He will forgive that sin and restore us to fellowship (1 John 1:9; cf. Psa 32:5). Being in fellowship with God means walking in the sphere of His light (1 John 1:5-7), being honest with Him about our sin (1 John 1:8, 10), and coming before His “throne of grace” (Heb 4:16) in transparent humility and confessing that sin in order to be forgiven familially (1 John 1:9). God is faithful and just to forgive our sins every time we confess them because of the atoning work of Christ who shed His blood on the cross for us (1 John 2:1-2). John wrote, “If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). Concerning 1 John 1:9, William MacDonald states: "The forgiveness John speaks about here [i.e. 1 John 1:9] is parental, not judicial. Judicial forgiveness means forgiveness from the penalty of sins, which the sinner receives when he believes on the Lord Jesus Christ. It is called judicial because it is granted by God acting as Judge. But what about sins which a person commits after conversion? As far as the penalty is concerned, the price has already been paid by the Lord Jesus on the cross of Calvary. But as far as fellowship in the family of God is concerned, the sinning saint needs parental forgiveness, that is, the forgiveness of His Father. He obtains it by confessing his sin. We need judicial forgiveness only once; that takes care of the penalty of all our sins—past, present, and future. But we need parental forgiveness throughout our Christian life."[10]      God's grace compels us to pursue righteousness and good works (Tit 2:11-14), which God has prepared for us to walk in (Eph 2:10). But since we still have a sinful nature and live in a fallen world with temptation all around, we occasionally fall into sin. When we sin, we agree with God that we have sinned and we confess it to Him seeking His forgiveness. When we sin against others and wrongly hurt them, we confess our sin to them and ask for their forgiveness. Because our sin hurts others (and their sin hurts us), there is a need for love, patience, humility, and ongoing forgiveness among the saints. The apostle Paul wrote “So, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience; bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you. Beyond all these things put on love, which is the perfect bond of unity. Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body; and be thankful” (Col 3:12-15). Dr. Steven R. Cook   [1] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 155. [2] Ibid., 1078. [3] Warren W. Wiersbe, The Bible Exposition Commentary, vol. 2, 127. [4] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three: Sin, Salvation, 227. [5] Paul P. Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology, 325–326. [6] Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 207. [7] Merrill F. Unger, et al, “Forgiveness,” The New Unger's Bible Dictionary, 440. [8] Henry Clarence Thiessen and Vernon D. Doerksen, Lectures in Systematic Theology, 276. [9] William MacDonald, Believer's Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments, 2310. [10] Ibid., 2310-11.

The nativity story is far more than the story of the birth of the promised Messiah. It is the integral moment in history when all things change and a routing of the kingdom of evil, the forces and gods of darkness, could finally be realize. Jesus is King and Lord, a mighty warrior taking on the true problem of evil in our universe, and his entry into our story sparked the battle for justice, love, and life. Check out this commercial-free special to learn more.https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2023/october-web-only/soul-civility-society-politics-religion-christianity-jesus.htmlBernie A. van de Walle, Rethinking Holiness: A Theological Introduction (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017).https://www.ncregister.com/blog/baby-indi-death-divine-reckoninghttps://www.dailywire.com/news/man-charged-for-beheading-satanic-display-in-iowa-state-capitolhttps://www.dailywire.com/news/democrat-senator-decries-breach-of-trust-in-gay-sex-tape-scandalSave on healthcare with Crossway Connect today: https://app.crosswayconnect.org/enroll...Build your own library of resources for biblical study with Logos Bible Software: https://logos.refr.cc/10minutechurchDeck yourself out with some Jesus swag and bear his name with apparel and accessories from SeekJesus.co:https://seekjesus.co/pages/_go_?ref=7...Get a copy of my new devotional journal Centering Prayer: Sit and Give Your Troubles to God: https://a.co/d/39pw2eEWebsite: 10minute.churchConvos With Dad: https://www.spreaker.com/show/convos-...X (formerly Twitter): @TheChrisW92Intro Song: AnthemArtist: Casey DarnellAlbum: EPCopyright 2010

Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts Let's face it the New Testament probably calls Jesus God (or god) a couple of times and so do early Christian authors in the second century. However, no one offers much of an explanation for what they mean by the title. Did early Christians think Jesus was God because he represented Yahweh? Did they think he was God because he shared the same eternal being as the Father? Did they think he was a god because that's just what they would call any immortalized human who lived in heaven? In this presentation I focus on the question from the perspective of Greco-Roman theology. Drawing on the work of David Litwa, Andrew Perriman, Barry Blackburn, and tons of ancient sources I seek to show how Mediterranean converts to Christianity would have perceived Jesus based on their cultural and religious assumptions. This presentation is from the 3rd Unitarian Christian Alliance Conference on October 20, 2023 in Springfield, OH. Here is the original pdf of this paper. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5Z3QbQ7dHc —— Links —— See more scholarly articles by Sean Finnegan Get the transcript of this episode Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here Introduction When early Christian authors called Jesus “god” (or “God”) what did they mean?[1] Modern apologists routinely point to pre-Nicene quotations in order to prove that early Christians always believed in the deity of Christ, by which they mean that he is of the same substance (homoousios) as the Father. However, most historians agree that Christians before the fourth century simply didn't have the cognitive categories available yet to think of Christ in Nicene or Chalcedonian ways. If this consensus is correct, it behooves us to consider other options for defining what early Christian authors meant. The obvious place to go to get an answer to our initial question is the New Testament. However, as is well known, the handful of instances in which authors unambiguously applied god (θεός) to Christ are fraught with textual uncertainty, grammatical ambiguity, and hermeneutical elasticity.[2]  What's more, granting that these contested texts[3] all call Jesus “god” provides little insight into what they might mean by that phrase. Turning to the second century, the earliest handful of texts that say Jesus is god are likewise textually uncertain or terse.[4] We must wait until the second half of the second century and beyond to have more helpful material to examine. We know that in the meanwhile some Christians were saying Jesus was god. What did they mean? One promising approach is to analyze biblical texts that call others gods. We find helpful parallels with the word god (אֱלֹהִים) applied to Moses (Exod 7.1; 4.16), judges (Exod 21.6; 22.8-9), kings (Is 9.6; Ps 45.6), the divine council (Ps 82.1, 6), and angels (Ps 8.6). These are texts in which God imbues his agents with his authority to represent him in some way. This rare though significant way of calling a representative “god,” continues in the NT with Jesus' clever defense to his accusers in John 10.34-36. Lexicons[5] have long recognized this “Hebraistic” usage and recent study tools such as the New English Translation (NET)[6] and the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary[7] also note this phenomenon. But, even if this agency perspective is the most natural reading of texts like Heb 1.8, later Christians, apart from one or two exceptions appear to be ignorant of this usage.[8] This interpretation was likely a casualty of the so-called parting of the ways whereby Christianity transitioned from a second-temple-Jewish movement to a Gentile-majority religion. As such, to grasp what early postapostolic Christians believed, we must turn our attention elsewhere. Michael Bird is right when he says, “Christian discourses about deity belong incontrovertibly in the Greco-Roman context because it provided the cultural encyclopedia that, in diverse ways, shaped the early church's Christological conceptuality and vocabulary.”[9] Learning Greco-Roman theology is not only important because that was the context in which early Christians wrote, but also because from the late first century onward, most of our Christian authors converted from that worldview. Rather than talking about the Hellenization of Christianity, we should begin by asking how Hellenists experienced Christianization. In other words, Greco-Roman beliefs about the gods were the default lens through which converts first saw Christ. In order to explore how Greco-Roman theology shaped what people believed about Jesus as god, we do well to begin by asking how they defined a god. Andrew Perriman offers a helpful starting point. “The gods,” he writes, “are mostly understood as corporeal beings, blessed with immortality, larger, more beautiful, and more powerful than their mortal analogues.”[10] Furthermore, there were lots of them! The sublunar realm was, in the words of Paula Fredriksen, “a god-congested place.”[11] What's more, “[S]harp lines and clearly demarcated boundaries between divinity and humanity were lacking."[12] Gods could appear as people and people could ascend to become gods. Comprehending what Greco-Roman people believed about gods coming down and humans going up will occupy the first part of this paper. Only once we've adjusted our thinking to their culture, will we walk through key moments in the life of Jesus of Nazareth to hear the story with ancient Mediterranean ears. Lastly, we'll consider the evidence from sources that think of Jesus in Greco-Roman categories. Bringing this all together we'll enumerate the primary ways to interpret the phrase “Jesus is god” available to Christians in the pre-Nicene period. Gods Coming Down and Humans Going Up The idea that a god would visit someone is not as unusual as it first sounds. We find plenty of examples of Yahweh himself or non-human representatives visiting people in the Hebrew Bible.[13] One psalmist even referred to angels or “heavenly beings” (ESV) as אֱלֹהִים (gods).[14] The Greco-Roman world too told stories about divine entities coming down to interact with people. Euripides tells about the time Zeus forced the god Apollo to become a human servant in the house of Admetus, performing menial labor as punishment for killing the Cyclopes (Alcestis 1). Baucis and Philemon offered hospitality to Jupiter and Mercury when they appeared in human form (Ovid, Metamorphoses 8.26-34). In Homer's Odyssey onlookers warn Antinous for flinging a stool against a stranger since “the gods do take on the look of strangers dropping in from abroad”[15] (17.534-9). Because they believed the boundary between the divine realm and the Earth was so permeable, Mediterranean people were always on guard for an encounter with a god in disguise. In addition to gods coming down, in special circumstances, humans could ascend and become gods too. Diodorus of Sicily demarcated two types of gods: those who are “eternal and imperishable, such as the sun and the moon” and “the other gods…terrestrial beings who attained to immortal honour”[16] (The Historical Library of Diodorus the Sicilian 6.1). By some accounts, even the Olympian gods, including Kronos and Uranus were once mortal men.[17] Among humans who could become divine, we find several distinguishable categories, including heroes, miracle workers, and rulers. We'll look at each briefly before considering how the story of Jesus would resonate with those holding a Greco-Roman worldview. Deified Heroes Cornutus the Stoic said, “[T]he ancients called heroes those who were so strong in body and soul that they seemed to be part of a divine race.” (Greek Theology 31)[18] At first this statement appears to be a mere simile, but he goes on to say of Heracles (Hercules), the Greek hero par excellence, “his services had earned him apotheosis” (ibid.). Apotheosis (or deification) is the process by which a human ascends into the divine realm. Beyond Heracles and his feats of strength, other exceptional individuals became deified for various reasons. Amphiarus was a seer who died in the battle at Thebes. After opening a chasm in the earth to swallow him in battle, “Zeus made him immortal”[19] (Apollodorus, Library of Greek Mythology 3.6). Pausanias says the custom of the inhabitants of Oropos was to drop coins into Amphiarus' spring “because this is where they say Amphiarus rose up as a god”[20] (Guide to Greece 1.34). Likewise, Strabo speaks about a shrine for Calchas, a deceased diviner from the Trojan war (Homer, Illiad 1.79-84), “where those consulting the oracle sacrifice a black ram to the dead and sleep in its hide”[21] (Strabo, Geography 6.3.9). Though the great majority of the dead were locked away in the lower world of Hades, leading a shadowy pitiful existence, the exceptional few could visit or speak from beyond the grave. Lastly, there was Zoroaster the Persian prophet who, according to Dio Chrysostom, was enveloped by fire while he meditated upon a mountain. He was unharmed and gave advice on how to properly make offerings to the gods (Dio Chrysostom, Discourses 36.40). The Psuedo-Clementine Homilies include a story about a lightning bolt striking and killing Zoroaster. After his devotees buried his body, they built a temple on the site, thinking that “his soul had been sent for by lightning” and they “worshipped him as a god”[22] (Homily 9.5.2). Thus, a hero could have extraordinary strength, foresight, or closeness to the gods resulting in apotheosis and ongoing worship and communication. Deified Miracle Workers Beyond heroes, Greco-Roman people loved to tell stories about deified miracle workers. Twice Orpheus rescued a ship from a storm by praying to the gods (Diodorus of Sicily 4.43.1f; 48.5f). After his death, surviving inscriptions indicate that he both received worship and was regarded as a god in several cities.[23] Epimenides “fell asleep in a cave for fifty-seven years”[24] (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 1.109). He also predicted a ten-year period of reprieve from Persian attack in Athens (Plato Laws 1.642D-E). Plato called him a divine man (θεῖος ἀνήρ) (ibid.) and Diogenes talked of Cretans sacrificing to him as a god (Diogenes, Lives 1.114). Iamblichus said Pythagoras was the son of Apollo and a mortal woman (Life of Pythagoras 2). Nonetheless, the soul of Pythagoras enjoyed multiple lives, having originally been “sent to mankind from the empire of Apollo”[25] (Life 2). Diogenes and Lucian enumerate the lives the pre-existent Pythagoras led, including Aethalides, Euphorbus, Hermotimus, and Pyrrhus (Diogenes, Life of Pythagoras 4; Lucian, The Cock 16-20). Hermes had granted Pythagoras the gift of “perpetual transmigration of his soul”[26] so he could remember his lives while living or dead (Diogenes, Life 4). Ancient sources are replete with Pythagorean miracle stories.[27] Porphyry mentions several, including taming a bear, persuading an ox to stop eating beans, and accurately predicting a catch of fish (Life of Pythagoras 23-25). Porphyry said Pythagoras accurately predicted earthquakes and “chased away a pestilence, suppressed violent winds and hail, [and] calmed storms on rivers and on seas” (Life 29).[28] Such miracles, argued the Pythagoreans made Pythagoras “a being superior to man, and not to a mere man” (Iamblichus, Life 28).[29] Iamblichus lays out the views of Pythagoras' followers, including that he was a god, a philanthropic daemon, the Pythian, the Hyperborean Apollo, a Paeon, a daemon inhabiting the moon, or an Olympian god (Life 6). Another pre-Socratic philosopher was Empedocles who studied under Pythagoras. To him sources attribute several miracles, including stopping a damaging wind, restoring the wind, bringing dry weather, causing it to rain, and even bringing someone back from Hades (Diogenes, Lives 8.59).[30] Diogenes records an incident in which Empedocles put a woman into a trance for thirty days before sending her away alive (8.61). He also includes a poem in which Empedocles says, “I am a deathless god, no longer mortal, I go among you honored by all, as is right”[31] (8.62). Asclepius was a son of the god Apollo and a human woman (Cornutus, Greek Theology 33). He was known for healing people from diseases and injuries (Pindar, Pythian 3.47-50). “[H]e invented any medicine he wished for the sick, and raised up the dead”[32] (Pausanias, Guide to Greece 2.26.4). However, as Diodorus relates, Hades complained to Zeus on account of Asclepius' diminishing his realm, which resulted in Zeus zapping Asclepius with a thunderbolt, killing him (4.71.2-3). Nevertheless, Asclepius later ascended into heaven to become a god (Hyginus, Fables 224; Cicero, Nature of the Gods 2.62).[33] Apollonius of Tyana was a famous first century miracle worker. According to Philostratus' account, the locals of Tyana regard Apollonius to be the son of Zeus (Life 1.6). Apollonius predicted many events, interpreted dreams, and knew private facts about people. He rebuked and ridiculed a demon, causing it to flee, shrieking as it went (Life 2.4).[34] He even once stopped a funeral procession and raised the deceased to life (Life 4.45). What's more he knew every human language (Life 1.19) and could understand what sparrows chirped to each other (Life 4.3). Once he instantaneously transported himself from Smyrna to Ephesus (Life 4.10). He claimed knowledge of his previous incarnation as the captain of an Egyptian ship (Life 3.23) and, in the end, Apollonius entered the temple of Athena and vanished, ascending from earth into heaven to the sound of a choir singing (Life 8.30). We have plenty of literary evidence that contemporaries and those who lived later regarded him as a divine man (Letters 48.3)[35] or godlike (ἰσόθεος) (Letters 44.1) or even just a god (θεός) (Life 5.24). Deified Rulers Our last category of deified humans to consider before seeing how this all relates to Jesus is rulers. Egyptians, as indicated from the hieroglyphs left in the pyramids, believed their deceased kings to enjoy afterlives as gods. They could become star gods or even hunt and consume other gods to absorb their powers.[36] The famous Macedonian conqueror, Alexander the Great, carried himself as a god towards the Persians though Plutarch opines, “[he] was not at all vain or deluded but rather used belief in his divinity to enslave others”[37] (Life of Alexander 28). This worship continued after his death, especially in Alexandria where Ptolemy built a tomb and established a priesthood to conduct religious honors to the deified ruler. Even the emperor Trajan offered a sacrifice to the spirit of Alexander (Cassius Dio, Roman History 68.30). Another interesting example is Antiochus I of Comagene who called himself “Antiochus the just [and] manifest god, friend of the Romans [and] friend of the Greeks.”[38] His tomb boasted four colossal figures seated on thrones: Zeus, Heracles, Apollo, and himself. The message was clear: Antiochus I wanted his subjects to recognize his place among the gods after death. Of course, the most relevant rulers for the Christian era were the Roman emperors. The first official Roman emperor Augustus deified his predecessor, Julius Caesar, celebrating his apotheosis with games (Suetonius, Life of Julius Caesar 88). Only five years after Augustus died, eastern inhabitants of the Roman Empire at Priene happily declared “the birthday of the god Augustus” (ἡ γενέθλιος ἡμέρα τοῦ θεοῦ)[39] to be the start of their provincial year. By the time of Tacitus, a century after Augustus died, the wealthy in Rome had statues of the first emperor in their gardens for worship (Annals 1.73). The Roman historian Appian explained that the Romans regularly deify emperors at death “provided he has not been a despot or a disgrace”[40] (The Civil Wars 2.148).  In other words, deification was the default setting for deceased emperors. Pliny the Younger lays it on pretty thick when he describes the process. He says Nero deified Claudius to expose him; Titus deified Vespasian and Domitian so he could be the son and brother of gods. However, Trajan deified Nerva because he genuinely believed him to be more than a human (Panegyric 11). In our little survey, we've seen three main categories of deified humans: heroes, miracle workers, and good rulers. These “conceptions of deity,” writes David Litwa, “were part of the “preunderstanding” of Hellenistic culture.”[41] He continues: If actual cases of deification were rare, traditions of deification were not. They were the stuff of heroic epic, lyric song, ancient mythology, cultic hymns, Hellenistic novels, and popular plays all over the first-century Mediterranean world. Such discourses were part of mainstream, urban culture to which most early Christians belonged. If Christians were socialized in predominantly Greco-Roman environments, it is no surprise that they employed and adapted common traits of deities and deified men to exalt their lord to divine status.[42] Now that we've attuned our thinking to Mediterranean sensibilities about gods coming down in the shape of humans and humans experiencing apotheosis to permanently dwell as gods in the divine realm, our ears are attuned to hear the story of Jesus with Greco-Roman ears. Hearing the Story of Jesus with Greco-Roman Ears How would second or third century inhabitants of the Roman empire have categorized Jesus? Taking my cue from Litwa's treatment in Iesus Deus, I'll briefly work through Jesus' conception, transfiguration, miracles, resurrection, and ascension. Miraculous Conception Although set within the context of Jewish messianism, Christ's miraculous birth would have resonated differently with Greco-Roman people. Stories of gods coming down and having intercourse with women are common in classical literature. That these stories made sense of why certain individuals were so exceptional is obvious. For example, Origen related a story about Apollo impregnating Amphictione who then gave birth to Plato (Against Celsus 1.37). Though Mary's conception did not come about through intercourse with a divine visitor, the fact that Jesus had no human father would call to mind divine sonship like Pythagoras or Asclepius. Celsus pointed out that the ancients “attributed a divine origin to Perseus, and Amphion, and Aeacus, and Minos” (Origen, Against Celsus 1.67). Philostratus records a story of the Egyptian god Proteus saying to Apollonius' mother that she would give birth to himself (Life of Apollonius of Tyana 1.4). Since people were primed to connect miraculous origins with divinity, typical hearers of the birth narratives of Matthew or Luke would likely think that this baby might be either be a descended god or a man destined to ascend to become a god. Miracles and Healing As we've seen, Jesus' miracles would not have sounded unbelievable or even unprecedent to Mediterranean people. Like Jesus, Orpheus and Empedocles calmed storms, rescuing ships. Though Jesus provided miraculous guidance on how to catch fish, Pythagoras foretold the number of fish in a great catch. After the fishermen painstakingly counted them all, they were astounded that when they threw them back in, they were still alive (Porphyry, Life 23-25). Jesus' ability to foretell the future, know people's thoughts, and cast out demons all find parallels in Apollonius of Tyana. As for resurrecting the dead, we have the stories of Empedocles, Asclepius, and Apollonius. The last of which even stopped a funeral procession to raise the dead, calling to mind Jesus' deeds in Luke 7.11-17. When Lycaonians witnessed Paul's healing of a man crippled from birth, they cried out, “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men” (Acts 14.11). Another time when no harm befell Paul after a poisonous snake bit him on Malta, Gentile onlookers concluded “he was a god” (Acts 28.6). Barry Blackburn makes the following observation: [I]n view of the tendency, most clearly seen in the Epimenidean, Pythagorean, and Apollonian traditions, to correlate impressive miracle-working with divine status, one may justifiably conclude that the evangelical miracle traditions would have helped numerous gentile Christians to arrive at and maintain belief in Jesus' divine status.[43] Transfiguration Ancient Mediterranean inhabitants believed that the gods occasionally came down disguised as people. Only when gods revealed their inner brilliant natures could people know that they weren't mere humans. After his ship grounded on the sands of Krisa, Apollo leaped from the ship emitting flashes of fire “like a star in the middle of day…his radiance shot to heaven”[44] (Homeric Hymns, Hymn to Apollo 440). Likewise, Aphrodite appeared in shining garments, brighter than a fire and shimmering like the moon (Hymn to Aphrodite 85-89). When Demeter appeared to Metaneira, she initially looked like an old woman, but she transformed herself before her. “Casting old age away…a delightful perfume spread…a radiance shone out far from the goddess' immortal flesh…and the solid-made house was filled with a light like the lightning-flash”[45] (Hymn to Demeter 275-280). Homer wrote about Odysseus' transformation at the golden wand of Athena in which his clothes became clean, he became taller, and his skin looked younger. His son, Telemachus cried out, “Surely you are some god who rules the vaulting skies”[46] (Odyssey 16.206). Each time the observers conclude the transfigured person is a god. Resurrection & Ascension In defending the resurrection of Jesus, Theophilus of Antioch said, “[Y]ou believe that Hercules, who burned himself, lives; and that Aesculapius [Asclepius], who was struck with lightning, was raised”[47] (Autolycus 1.13). Although Hercules' physical body burnt, his transformed pneumatic body continued on as the poet Callimachus said, “under a Phrygian oak his limbs had been deified”[48] (Callimachus, Hymn to Artemis 159). Others thought Hercules ascended to heaven in his burnt body, which Asclepius subsequently healed (Lucian, Dialogue of the Gods 13). After his ascent, Diodorus relates how the people first sacrificed to him “as to a hero” then in Athens they began to honor him “with sacrifices like as to a god”[49] (The Historical Library 4.39). As for Asclepius, his ascension resulted in his deification as Cyprian said, “Aesculapius is struck by lightning, that he may rise into a god”[50] (On the Vanity of Idols 2). Romulus too “was torn to pieces by the hands of a hundred senators”[51] and after death ascended into heaven and received worship (Arnobius, Against the Heathen 1.41). Livy tells of how Romulus was “carried up on high by a whirlwind” and that immediately afterward “every man present hailed him as a god and son of a god”[52] (The Early History of Rome 1.16). As we can see from these three cases—Hercules, Asclepius, and Romulus—ascent into heaven was a common way of talking about deification. For Cicero, this was an obvious fact. People “who conferred outstanding benefits were translated to heaven through their fame and our gratitude”[53] (Nature 2.62). Consequently, Jesus' own resurrection and ascension would have triggered Gentiles to intuit his divinity. Commenting on the appearance of the immortalized Christ to the eleven in Galilee, Wendy Cotter said, “It is fair to say that the scene found in [Mat] 28:16-20 would be understood by a Greco-Roman audience, Jew or Gentile, as an apotheosis of Jesus.”[54] Although I beg to differ with Cotter's whole cloth inclusion of Jews here, it's hard to see how else non-Jews would have regarded the risen Christ. Litwa adds Rev 1.13-16 “[W]here he [Jesus] appears with all the accoutrements of the divine: a shining face, an overwhelming voice, luminescent clothing, and so on.”[55] In this brief survey we've seen that several key events in the story of Jesus told in the Gospels would have caused Greco-Roman hearers to intuit deity, including his divine conception, miracles, healing ministry, transfiguration, resurrection, and ascension. In their original context of second temple Judaism, these very same incidents would have resonated quite differently. His divine conception authenticated Jesus as the second Adam (Luke 3.38; Rom 5.14; 1 Cor 15.45) and God's Davidic son (2 Sam 7.14; Ps 2.7; Lk 1.32, 35). If Matthew or Luke wanted readers to understand that Jesus was divine based on his conception and birth, they failed to make such intentions explicit in the text. Rather, the birth narratives appear to have a much more modest aim—to persuade readers that Jesus had a credible claim to be Israel's messiah. His miracles show that “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power…for God was with him” (Acts 10.38; cf. Jn 3.2; 10.32, 38). Rather than concluding Jesus to be a god, Jewish witnesses to his healing of a paralyzed man “glorified God, who had given such authority to men” (Mat 9.8). Over and over, especially in the Gospel of John, Jesus directs people's attention to his Father who was doing the works in and through him (Jn 5.19, 30; 8.28; 12.49; 14.10). Seeing Jesus raise someone from the dead suggested to his original Jewish audience that “a great prophet has arisen among us” (Lk 7.16). The transfiguration, in its original setting, is an eschatological vision not a divine epiphany. Placement in the synoptic Gospels just after Jesus' promise that some there would not die before seeing the kingdom come sets the hermeneutical frame. “The transfiguration,” says William Lane, “was a momentary, but real (and witnessed) manifestation of Jesus' sovereign power which pointed beyond itself to the Parousia, when he will come ‘with power and glory.'”[56] If eschatology is the foreground, the background for the transfiguration was Moses' ascent of Sinai when he also encountered God and became radiant.[57] Viewed from the lenses of Moses' ascent and the eschaton, the transfiguration of Jesus is about his identity as God's definitive chosen ruler, not about any kind of innate divinity. Lastly, the resurrection and ascension validated Jesus' messianic claims to be the ruler of the age to come (Acts 17.31; Rom 1.4). Rather than concluding Jesus was deity, early Jewish Christians concluded these events showed that “God has made him both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2.36). The interpretative backgrounds for Jesus' ascension were not stories about Heracles, Asclepius, or Romulus. No, the key oracle that framed the Israelite understanding was the messianic psalm in which Yahweh told David's Lord to “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool” (Psalm 110.1). The idea is of a temporary sojourn in heaven until exercising the authority of his scepter to rule over earth from Zion. Once again, the biblical texts remain completely silent about deification. But even if the original meanings of Jesus' birth, ministry, transfiguration, resurrection, and ascension have messianic overtones when interpreted within the Jewish milieu, these same stories began to communicate various ideas of deity to Gentile converts in the generations that followed. We find little snippets from historical sources beginning in the second century and growing with time. Evidence of Belief in Jesus' as a Greco-Roman Deity To begin with, we have two non-Christian instances where Romans regarded Jesus as a deity within typical Greco-Roman categories. The first comes to us from Tertullian and Eusebius who mention an intriguing story about Tiberius' request to the Roman senate to deify Christ. Convinced by “intelligence from Palestine of events which had clearly shown the truth of Christ's divinity”[58] Tiberius proposed the matter to the senate (Apology 5). Eusebius adds that Tiberius learned that “many believed him to be a god in rising from the dead”[59] (Church History 2.2). As expected, the senate rejected the proposal. I mention this story, not because I can establish its historicity, but because it portrays how Tiberius would have thought about Jesus if he had heard about his miracles and resurrection. Another important incident is from one of the governor Pliny the Younger's letters to the emperor Trajan. Having investigated some people accused of Christianity, he found “they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately amongst themselves in honour of Christ as if to a god”[60] (Letter 96). To an outside imperial observer like Pliny, the Christians believed in a man who had performed miracles, defeated death, and now lived in heaven. Calling him a god was just the natural way of talking about such a person. Pliny would not have thought Jesus was superior to the deified Roman emperors much less Zeus or the Olympic gods. If he believed in Jesus at all, he would have regarded him as another Mediterranean prophet who escaped Hades to enjoy apotheosis. Another interesting text to consider is the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. This apocryphal text tells the story of Jesus' childhood between the ages of five and twelve. Jesus is impetuous, powerful, and brilliant. Unsure to conclude that Jesus was “either god or angel,”[61] his teacher remands him to Joseph's custody (7). Later, a crowd of onlookers ponders whether the child is a god or a heavenly messenger after he raises an infant from the dead (17). A year later Jesus raised a construction man who had fallen to his death back to life (18). Once again, the crowd asked if the child was from heaven. Although some historians are quick to assume the lofty conceptions of Justin and his successors about the logos were commonplace in the early Christianity, Litwa points out, “The spell of the Logos could only bewitch a very small circle of Christian elites… In IGT, we find a Jesus who is divine according to different canons, the canons of popular Mediterranean theology.”[62] Another important though often overlooked scholarly group of Christians in the second century was led by a certain Theodotus of Byzantium.[63] Typically referred to by their heresiological label “Theodotians,” these dynamic monarchians lived in Rome and claimed that they held to the original Christology before it had been corrupted under Bishop Zephyrinus (Eusebius, Church History 5.28). Theodotus believed in the virgin birth, but not in his pre-existence or that he was god/God (Pseudo-Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.35.1-2; 10.23.1-2). He thought that Jesus was not able to perform any miracles until his baptism when he received the Christ/Spirit. Pseudo-Hippolytus goes on to say, “But they do not want him to have become a god when the Spirit descended. Others say that he became a god after he rose from the dead.”[64] This last tantalizing remark implies that the Theodotians could affirm Jesus as a god after his resurrection though they denied his pre-existence. Although strict unitarians, they could regard Jesus as a god in that he was an ascended immortalized being who lived in heaven—not equal to the Father, but far superior to all humans on earth. Justin Martyr presents another interesting case to consider. Thoroughly acquainted with Greco-Roman literature and especially the philosophy of Plato, Justin sees Christ as a god whom the Father begot before all other creatures. He calls him “son, or wisdom, or angel, or god, or lord, or word”[65] (Dialogue with Trypho 61).  For Justin Christ is “at the same time angel and god and lord and man”[66] (59). Jesus was “of old the Word, appearing at one time in the form of fire, at another under the guise of incorporeal beings, but now, at the will of God, after becoming man for mankind”[67] (First Apology 63). In fact, Justin is quite comfortable to compare Christ to deified heroes and emperors. He says, “[W]e propose nothing new or different from that which you say about the so-called sons of Jupiter [Zeus] by your respected writers… And what about the emperors who die among you, whom you think worthy to be deified?”[68] (21). He readily accepts the parallels with Mercury, Perseus, Asclepius, Bacchus, and Hercules, but argues that Jesus is superior to them (22).[69] Nevertheless, he considered Jesus to be in “a place second to the unchanging and eternal God”[70] (13). The Father is “the Most True God” whereas the Son is he “who came forth from Him”[71] (6). Even as lates as Origen, Greco-Roman concepts of deity persist. In responding to Celsus' claim that no god or son of God has ever come down, Origen responds by stating such a statement would overthrow the stories of Pythian Apollo, Asclepius, and the other gods who descended (Against Celsus 5.2). My point here is not to say Origen believed in all the old myths, but to show how Origen reached for these stories as analogies to explain the incarnation of the logos. When Celsus argued that he would rather believe in the deity of Asclepius, Dionysus, and Hercules than Christ, Origen responded with a moral rather than ontological argument (3.42). He asks how these gods have improved the characters of anyone. Origen admits Celsus' argument “which places the forenamed individuals upon an equality with Jesus” might have force, however in light of the disreputable behavior of these gods, “how could you any longer say, with any show of reason, that these men, on putting aside their mortal body, became gods rather than Jesus?”[72] (3.42). Origen's Christology is far too broad and complicated to cover here. Undoubtedly, his work on eternal generation laid the foundation on which fourth century Christians could build homoousion Christology. Nevertheless, he retained some of the earlier subordinationist impulses of his forebearers. In his book On Prayer, he rebukes praying to Jesus as a crude error, instead advocating prayer to God alone (10). In his Commentary on John he repeatedly asserts that the Father is greater than his logos (1.40; 2.6; 6.23). Thus, Origen is a theologian on the seam of the times. He's both a subordinationist and a believer in the Son's eternal and divine ontology. Now, I want to be careful here. I'm not saying that all early Christians believed Jesus was a deified man like Asclepius or a descended god like Apollo or a reincarnated soul like Pythagoras. More often than not, thinking Christians whose works survive until today tended to eschew the parallels, simultaneously elevating Christ as high as possible while demoting the gods to mere demons. Still, Litwa is inciteful when he writes: It seems likely that early Christians shared the widespread cultural assumption that a resurrected, immortalized being was worthy of worship and thus divine. …Nonetheless there is a difference…Jesus, it appears, was never honored as an independent deity. Rather, he was always worshiped as Yahweh's subordinate. Naturally Heracles and Asclepius were Zeus' subordinates, but they were also members of a larger divine family. Jesus does not enter a pantheon but assumes a distinctive status as God's chief agent and plenipotentiary. It is this status that, to Christian insiders, placed Jesus in a category far above the likes of Heracles, Romulus, and Asclepius who were in turn demoted to the rank of δαίμονες [daimons].[73] Conclusion I began by asking the question, "What did early Christians mean by saying Jesus is god?" We noted that the ancient idea of agency (Jesus is God/god because he represents Yahweh), though present in Hebrew and Christian scripture, didn't play much of a role in how Gentile Christians thought about Jesus. Or if it did, those texts did not survive. By the time we enter the postapostolic era, a majority of Christianity was Gentile and little communication occurred with the Jewish Christians that survived in the East. As such, we turned our attention to Greco-Roman theology to tune our ears to hear the story of Jesus the way they would have. We learned about their multifaceted array of divinities. We saw that gods can come down and take the form of humans and humans can go up and take the form of gods. We found evidence for this kind of thinking in both non-Christian and Christian sources in the second and third centuries. Now it is time to return to the question I began with: “When early Christian authors called Jesus “god” what did they mean?” We saw that the idea of a deified man was present in the non-Christian witnesses of Tiberius and Pliny but made scant appearance in our Christian literature except for the Theodotians. As for the idea that a god came down to become a man, we found evidence in The Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Justin, and Origen.[74] Of course, we find a spectrum within this view, from Justin's designation of Jesus as a second god to Origen's more philosophically nuanced understanding. Still, it's worth noting as R. P. C. Hanson observed that, “With the exception of Athanasius virtually every theologian, East and West, accepted some form of subordinationism at least up to the year 355.”[75] Whether any Christians before Alexander and Athanasius of Alexandria held to the sophisticated idea of consubstantiality depends on showing evidence of the belief that the Son was coequal, coeternal, and coessential with the Father prior to Nicea. (Readers interested in the case for this view should consult Michael Bird's Jesus among the Gods in which he attempted the extraordinary feat of finding proto-Nicene Christology in the first two centuries, a task typically associated with maverick apologists not peer-reviewed historians.) In conclusion, the answer to our driving question about the meaning of “Jesus as god” is that the answer depends on whom we ask. If we ask the Theodotians, Jesus is a god because that's just what one calls an immortalized man who lives in heaven.[76] If we ask those holding a docetic Christology, the answer is that a god came down in appearance as a man. If we ask a logos subordinationist, they'll tell us that Jesus existed as the god through whom the supreme God created the universe before he became a human being. If we ask Tertullian, Jesus is god because he derives his substance from the Father, though he has a lesser portion of divinity.[77] If we ask Athanasius, he'll wax eloquent about how Jesus is of the same substance as the Father equal in status and eternality. The bottom line is that there was not one answer to this question prior to the fourth century. Answers depend on whom we ask and when they lived. Still, we can't help but wonder about the more tantalizing question of development. Which Christology was first and which ones evolved under social, intellectual, and political pressures? In the quest to specify the various stages of development in the Christologies of the ante-Nicene period, this Greco-Roman perspective may just provide the missing link between the reserved and limited way that the NT applies theos to Jesus in the first century and the homoousian view that eventually garnered imperial support in the fourth century. How easy would it have been for fresh converts from the Greco-Roman world to unintentionally mishear the story of Jesus? How easy would it have been for them to fit Jesus into their own categories of descended gods and ascended humans? With the unmooring of Gentile Christianity from its Jewish heritage, is it any wonder that Christologies began to drift out to sea? Now I'm not suggesting that all Christians went through a steady development from a human Jesus to a pre-existent Christ, to an eternal God the Son, to the Chalcedonian hypostatic union. As I mentioned above, plenty of other options were around and every church had its conservatives in addition to its innovators. The story is messy and uneven with competing views spread across huge geographic distances. Furthermore, many Christians probably were content to leave such theological nuances fuzzy, rather than seeking doctrinal precision on Christ's relation to his God and Father. Whatever the case may be, we dare not ignore the influence of Greco-Roman theology in our accounts of Christological development in the Mediterranean world of the first three centuries.    Bibliography The Homeric Hymns. Translated by Michael Crudden. New York, NY: Oxford, 2008. Antioch, Theophilus of. To Autolycus. Translated by Marcus Dods. Vol. 2. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. Aphrahat. The Demonstrations. Translated by Ellen Muehlberger. Vol. 3. The Cambridge Edition of Early Christian Writings. Edited by Mark DelCogliano. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2022. Apollodorus. The Library of Greek Mythology. Translated by Robin Hard. Oxford, UK: Oxford, 1998. Appian. The Civil Wars. Translated by John Carter. London, UK: Penguin, 1996. Arnobius. Against the Heathen. Translated by Hamilton Bryce and Hugh Campbell. Vol. 6. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995. Arrian. The Campaigns of Alexander. Translated by Aubrey De Sélincourt. London, UK: Penguin, 1971. Bird, Michael F. Jesus among the Gods. Waco, TX: Baylor, 2022. Blackburn, Barry. Theios Aner and the Markan Miracle Traditions. Tübingen, Germany: J. C. B. Mohr, 1991. Callimachus. Hymn to Artemis. Translated by Susan A. Stephens. Callimachus: The Hymns. New York, NY: Oxford, 2015. Cicero. The Nature of the Gods. Translated by Patrick Gerard Walsh. Oxford, UK: Oxford, 2008. Cornutus, Lucius Annaeus. Greek Theology. Translated by George Boys-Stones. Greek Theology, Fragments, and Testimonia. Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2018. Cotter, Wendy. "Greco-Roman Apotheosis Traditions and the Resurrection Appearances in Matthew." In The Gospel of Matthew in Current Study. Edited by David E. Aune. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001. Cyprian. Treatise 6: On the Vanity of Idols. Translated by Ernest Wallis. Vol. 5. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995. Dittenberger, W. Orientis Graecae Inscriptiones Selectae. Vol. 2. Hildesheim: Olms, 1960. Eusebius. The Church History. Translated by Paul L. Maier. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007. Fredriksen, Paula. "How High Can Early High Christology Be?" In Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity. Edited by Matthew V. Novenson. Vol. 180.vol. Supplements to Novum Testamentum. Leiden: Brill, 2020. Hanson, R. P. C. Search for a Christian Doctrine of God. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007. Hart, George. The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Routledge, 2005. Homer. The Odyssey. Translated by Robert Fagles. New York, NY: Penguin, 1997. Iamblichus. Life of Pythagoras. Translated by Thomas Taylor. Iamblichus' Life of Pythagoras. Delhi, IN: Zinc Read, 2023. Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho. Translated by Thomas B. Falls. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2003. Laertius, Diogenes. Life of Pythagoras. Translated by Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie. The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library. Edited by David R. Fideler. Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988. Laertius, Diogenes. Lives of the Eminent Philosophers. Translated by Pamela Mensch. Edited by James Miller. New York, NY: Oxford, 2020. Lane, William L. The Gospel of Mark. Nicnt, edited by F. F. Bruce Ned B. Stonehouse, and Gordon D. Fee. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974. Litwa, M. David. Iesus Deus. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014. Livy. The Early History of Rome. Translated by Aubrey De Sélincourt. London, UK: Penguin, 2002. Origen. Against Celsus. Translated by Frederick Crombie. Vol. 4. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Pausanias. Guide to Greece. Translated by Peter Levi. London, UK: Penguin, 1979. Perriman, Andrew. In the Form of a God. Studies in Early Christology, edited by David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower. Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022. Philostratus. Letters of Apollonius. Vol. 458. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 2006. Plutarch. Life of Alexander. Translated by Ian Scott-Kilvert and Timothy E. Duff. The Age of Alexander. London, UK: Penguin, 2011. Porphyry. Life of Pythagoras. Translated by Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie. The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library. Edited by David Fideler. Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988. Pseudo-Clement. Recognitions. Translated by Thomas Smith. Vol. 8. Ante Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Pseudo-Hippolytus. Refutation of All Heresies. Translated by David Litwa. Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2016. Pseudo-Thomas. Infancy Gospel of Thomas. Translated by James Orr. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1903. Psuedo-Clement. Homilies. Translated by Peter Peterson. Vol. 8. Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1897. Siculus, Diodorus. The Historical Library. Translated by Charles Henry Oldfather. Vol. 1. Edited by Giles Laurén: Sophron Editor, 2017. Strabo. The Geography. Translated by Duane W. Roller. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2020. Tertullian. Against Praxeas. Translated by Holmes. Vol. 3. Ante Nice Fathers. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Tertullian. Apology. Translated by S. Thelwall. Vol. 3. Ante-Nicene Fathers, edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003. Younger, Pliny the. The Letters of the Younger Pliny. Translated by Betty Radice. London: Penguin, 1969. End Notes [1] For the remainder of this paper, I will use the lower case “god” for all references to deity outside of Yahweh, the Father of Christ. I do this because all our ancient texts lack capitalization and our modern capitalization rules imply a theology that is anachronistic and unhelpful for the present inquiry. [2] Christopher Kaiser wrote, “Explicit references to Jesus as ‘God' in the New Testament are very few, and even those few are generally plagued with uncertainties of either text or interpretation.” Christopher B. Kaiser, The Doctrine of God: A Historical Survey (London: Marshall Morgan & Scott, 1982), 29. Other scholars such as Raymond Brown (Jesus: God and Man), Jason David BeDuhn (Truth in Translation), and Brian Wright (“Jesus as θεός: A Textual Examination” in Revisiting the Corruption of the New Testament) have expressed similar sentiments. [3] John 20.28; Hebrews 1.8; Titus 2.13; 2 Peter 1.1; Romans 9.5; and 1 John 5.20. [4] See Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians 12.2 where a manuscript difference determines whether or not Polycarp called Jesus god or lord. Textual corruption is most acute in Igantius' corpus. Although it's been common to dismiss the long recension as an “Arian” corruption, claiming the middle recension to be as pure and uncontaminated as freshly fallen snow upon which a foot has never trodden, such an uncritical view is beginning to give way to more honest analysis. See Paul Gilliam III's Ignatius of Antioch and the Arian Controversy (Leiden: Brill, 2017) for a recent treatment of Christological corruption in the middle recension. [5] See the entries for  אֱלֹהִיםand θεός in the Hebrew Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament (HALOT), the Brown Driver Briggs Lexicon (BDB), Eerdmans Dictionary, Kohlenberger/Mounce Concise Hebrew-Aramaic Dictionary of the Old Testament, the Bauer Danker Arndt Gingrich Lexicon (BDAG), Friberg Greek Lexicon, and Thayer's Greek Lexicon. [6] See notes on Is 9.6 and Ps 45.6. [7] ZIBBC: “In what sense can the king be called “god”? By virtue of his divine appointment, the king in the ancient Near East stood before his subjects as a representative of the divine realm. …In fact, the term “gods“ (ʾelōhı̂m) is used of priests who functioned as judges in the Israelite temple judicial system (Ex. 21:6; 22:8-9; see comments on 58:1; 82:6-7).” John W. Hilber, “Psalms,” in The Minor Prophets, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, vol. 5 of Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Old Testament. ed. John H. Walton (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2009), 358. [8] Around a.d. 340, Aphrahat of Persia advised his fellow Christians to reply to Jewish critics who questioned why “You call a human being ‘God'” (Demonstrations 17.1). He said, “For the honored name of the divinity is granted event ot rightoues human beings, when they are worthy of being called by it…[W]hen he chose Moses, his friend and his beloved…he called him “god.” …We call him God, just as he named Moses with his own name…The name of the divinity was granted for great honor in the world. To whom he wishes, God appoints it” (17.3, 4, 5). Aphrahat, The Demonstrations, trans., Ellen Muehlberger, vol. 3, The Cambridge Edition of Early Christian Writings (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2022), 213-15. In the Clementine Recognitions we find a brief mention of the concept:  “Therefore the name God is applied in three ways: either because he to whom it is given is truly God, or because he is the servant of him who is truly; and for the honour of the sender, that his authority may be full, he that is sent is called by the name of him who sends, as is often done in respect of angels: for when they appear to a man, if he is a wise and intelligent man, he asks the name of him who appears to him, that he may acknowledge at once the honour of the sent, and the authority of the sender” (2.42). Pseudo-Clement, Recognitions, trans., Thomas Smith, vol. 8, Ante Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003). [9] Michael F. Bird, Jesus among the Gods (Waco, TX: Baylor, 2022), 13. [10] Andrew Perriman, In the Form of a God, Studies in Early Christology, ed. David Capes Michael Bird, and Scott Harrower (Eugene, OR: Cascade Books, 2022), 130. [11] Paula Fredriksen, "How High Can Early High Christology Be?," in Monotheism and Christology in Greco-Roman Antiquity, ed. Matthew V. Novenson, vol. 180 (Leiden: Brill, 2020), 296, 99. [12] ibid. [13] See Gen 18.1; Ex 3.2; 24.11; Is 6.1; Ezk 1.28. [14] Compare the Masoretic Text of Psalm 8.6 to the Septuagint and Hebrews 2.7. [15] Homer, The Odyssey, trans., Robert Fagles (New York, NY: Penguin, 1997), 370. [16] Diodorus Siculus, The Historical Library, trans., Charles Henry Oldfather, vol. 1 (Sophron Editor, 2017), 340. [17] Uranus met death at the brutal hands of his own son, Kronos who emasculated him and let bleed out, resulting in his deification (Eusebius, Preparation for the Gospel 1.10). Later on, after suffering a fatal disease, Kronos himself experienced deification, becoming the planet Saturn (ibid.). Zeus married Hera and they produced Osiris (Dionysus), Isis (Demeter), Typhon, Apollo, and Aphrodite (ibid. 2.1). [18] Lucius Annaeus Cornutus, Greek Theology, trans., George Boys-Stones, Greek Theology, Fragments, and Testimonia (Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2018), 123. [19] Apollodorus, The Library of Greek Mythology, trans., Robin Hard (Oxford, UK: Oxford, 1998), 111. [20] Pausanias, Guide to Greece, trans., Peter Levi (London, UK: Penguin, 1979), 98. [21] Strabo, The Geography, trans., Duane W. Roller (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge, 2020), 281. [22] Psuedo-Clement, Homilies, trans., Peter Peterson, vol. 8, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1897). Greek: “αὐτὸν δὲ ὡς θεὸν ἐθρήσκευσαν” from Jacques Paul Migne, Patrologia Graeca, taken from Accordance (PSCLEMH-T), OakTree Software, Inc., 2018, Version 1.1. [23] See Barry Blackburn, Theios Aner and the Markan Miracle Traditions (Tübingen, Germany: J. C. B. Mohr, 1991), 32. [24] Diogenes Laertius, Lives of the Eminent Philosophers, trans., Pamela Mensch (New York, NY: Oxford, 2020), 39. [25] Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras, trans., Thomas Taylor, Iamblichus' Life of Pythagoras (Delhi, IN: Zinc Read, 2023), 2. [26] Diogenes Laertius, Life of Pythagoras, trans., Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie, The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988), 142. [27] See the list in Blackburn, 39. He corroborates miracle stories from Diogenus Laertius, Iamblichus, Apollonius, Nicomachus, and Philostratus. [28] Porphyry, Life of Pythagoras, trans., Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie, The Pythagorean Sourcebook and Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Phanes Press, 1988), 128-9. [29] Iamblichus,  68. [30] What I call “resurrection” refers to the phrase, “Thou shalt bring back from Hades a dead man's strength.” Diogenes Laertius 8.2.59, trans. R. D. Hicks. [31] Laertius, "Lives of the Eminent Philosophers," 306. Two stories of his deification survive: in one Empedocles disappears in the middle of the night after hearing an extremely loud voice calling his name. After this the people concluded that they should sacrifice to him since he had become a god (8.68). In the other account, Empedocles climbs Etna and leaps into the fiery volcanic crater “to strengthen the rumor that he had become a god” (8.69). [32] Pausanias,  192. Sextus Empiricus says Asclepius raised up people who had died at Thebes as well as raising up the dead body of Tyndaros (Against the Professors 1.261). [33] Cicero adds that the Arcadians worship Asclepius (Nature 3.57). [34] In another instance, he confronted and cast out a demon from a licentious young man (Life 4.20). [35] The phrase is “περὶ ἐμοῦ καὶ θεοῖς εἴρηται ὡς περὶ θείου ἀνδρὸς.” Philostratus, Letters of Apollonius, vol. 458, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard, 2006). [36] See George Hart, The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, 2nd ed. (Oxford, UK: Routledge, 2005), 3. [37] Plutarch, Life of Alexander, trans., Ian Scott-Kilvert and Timothy E. Duff, The Age of Alexander (London, UK: Penguin, 2011), 311. Arrian includes a story about Anaxarchus advocating paying divine honors to Alexander through prostration. The Macedonians refused but the Persian members of his entourage “rose from their seats and one by one grovelled on the floor before the King.” Arrian, The Campaigns of Alexander, trans., Aubrey De Sélincourt (London, UK: Penguin, 1971), 222. [38] Translation my own from “Ἀντίοχος ὁ Θεὸς Δίκαιος Ἐπιφανὴς Φιλορωμαῖος Φιλέλλην.” Inscription at Nemrut Dağ, accessible at https://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/display.php?page=cimrm32. See also https://zeugma.packhum.org/pdfs/v1ch09.pdf. [39] Greek taken from W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graecae Inscriptiones Selectae, vol. 2 (Hildesheim: Olms, 1960), 48-60. Of particular note is the definite article before θεός. They didn't celebrate the birthday of a god, but the birthday of the god. [40] Appian, The Civil Wars, trans., John Carter (London, UK: Penguin, 1996), 149. [41] M. David Litwa, Iesus Deus (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2014), 20. [42] ibid. [43] Blackburn, 92-3. [44] The Homeric Hymns, trans., Michael Crudden (New York, NY: Oxford, 2008), 38. [45] "The Homeric Hymns," 14. [46] Homer,  344. [47] Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus, trans., Marcus Dods, vol. 2, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001). [48] Callimachus, Hymn to Artemis, trans., Susan A. Stephens, Callimachus: The Hymns (New York, NY: Oxford, 2015), 119. [49] Siculus,  234. [50] Cyprian, Treatise 6: On the Vanity of Idols, trans., Ernest Wallis, vol. 5, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995). [51] Arnobius, Against the Heathen, trans., Hamilton Bryce and Hugh Campbell, vol. 6, Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995). [52] Livy, The Early History of Rome, trans., Aubrey De Sélincourt (London, UK: Penguin, 2002), 49. [53] Cicero, The Nature of the Gods, trans., Patrick Gerard Walsh (Oxford, UK: Oxford, 2008), 69. [54] Wendy Cotter, "Greco-Roman Apotheosis Traditions and the Resurrection Appearances in Matthew," in The Gospel of Matthew in Current Study, ed. David E. Aune (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2001), 149. [55] Litwa, 170. [56] William L. Lane, The Gospel of Mark, Nicnt, ed. F. F. Bruce Ned B. Stonehouse, and Gordon D. Fee (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974). [57] “Recent commentators have stressed that the best background for understanding the Markan transfiguration is the story of Moses' ascent up Mount Sinai (Exod. 24 and 34).” Litwa, 123. [58] Tertullian, Apology, trans. S. Thelwall, vol. 3, Ante-Nicene Fathers, ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003). [59] Eusebius, The Church History, trans. Paul L. Maier (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2007), 54. [60] Pliny the Younger, The Letters of the Younger Pliny, trans., Betty Radice (London: Penguin, 1969), 294. [61] Pseudo-Thomas, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, trans., James Orr (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1903), 25. [62] Litwa, 83. [63] For sources on Theodotus, see Pseduo-Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.35.1-2; 10.23.1-2; Pseudo-Tertullian, Against All Heresies 8.2; Eusebius, Church History 5.28. [64] Pseudo-Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, trans., David Litwa (Atlanta, GA: SBL, 2016), 571. [65] I took the liberty to decapitalize these appellatives. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, trans. Thomas B. Falls (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2003), 244. [66] Justin Martyr, 241. (Altered, see previous footnote.) [67] Justin Martyr, 102. [68] Justin Martyr, 56-7. [69] Arnobius makes a similar argument in Against the Heathen 1.38-39 “Is he not worthy to be called a god by us and felt to be a god on account of the favor or such great benefits? For if you have enrolled Liber among the gods because he discovered the use of wine, and Ceres the use of bread, Aesculapius the use of medicines, Minerva the use of oil, Triptolemus plowing, and Hercules because he conquered and restrained beasts, thieves, and the many-headed hydra…So then, ought we not to consider Christ a god, and to bestow upon him all the worship due to his divinity?” Translation from Litwa, 105. [70] Justin Martyr, 46. [71] Justin Martyr, 39. [72] Origen, Against Celsus, trans. Frederick Crombie, vol. 4, The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003). [73] Litwa, 173. [74] I could easily multiply examples of this by looking at Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and many others. [75] The obvious exception to Hanson's statement were thinkers like Sabellius and Praxeas who believed that the Father himself came down as a human being. R. P. C. Hanson, Search for a Christian Doctrine of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), xix. [76] Interestingly, even some of the biblical unitarians of the period were comfortable with calling Jesus god, though they limited his divinity to his post-resurrection life. [77] Tertullian writes, “[T]he Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being. For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: “My Father is greater than I.” In the Psalm His inferiority is described as being “a little lower than the angels.” Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son” (Against Praxeas 9). Tertullian, Against Praxeas, trans., Holmes, vol. 3, Ante Nice Fathers (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003).

The Spirit's Regeneration, Indwelling, Baptizing, and Sealing Ministry At the moment of salvation, God the Holy Spirit performs several acts for new believers, which include regeneration (John 3:6; Tit 3:5; 1 Pet 1:3), indwelling (John 14:16-17; 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19), baptizing (1 Cor 12:13; Gal 3:27), and sealing (Eph 4:30). Regeneration The word regeneration itself occurs only twice in the Bible (Matt 19:28 and Tit 3:5). In both places the Greek word used is paliggenesia (παλιγγενεσία), which means, “the state of being renewed… [the] experience of a complete change of life, rebirth of a redeemed person.”[1] Regeneration means new believers receive spiritual life at the moment they trust in Christ alone as their Savior. Geisler states, “The new birth of which Jesus speaks is the act of regeneration, whereby God imparts spiritual life to the believer's soul (1 Peter 1:23).”[2] Paul Enns agrees, saying, “Succinctly stated, to regenerate means ‘to impart life.' Regeneration is the act whereby God imparts life to the one who believes.”[3] Ryrie notes: "Although the word regeneration is used only twice in the Bible (Titus 3:5, where it refers to the new birth, and Mt 19:28 where it refers to the millennial kingdom), the concept of being born again is found in other passages, notably John 3. Technically, it is God's act of begetting eternal life in the one who believes in Christ. While faith and regeneration are closely associated, the two ideas are distinct, faith being the human responsibility and the channel through which God's grace is received, and regeneration being God's supernatural act of imparting eternal life."[4] David Anderson adds: "The NT uses a number of different words and images to convey the doctrine of regeneration. The noun palingenesia is used just twice: Matthew 19:28 and Titus 3:5. In Matthew, Jesus is speaking of the regeneration which will occur at His second coming. He refers to setting up His kingdom, placing the twelve over the twelve tribes of Israel, and rewarding those who have sacrificed for His cause. But in Titus 3:5, we have a direct reference to the rebirth of the believer: “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.”[5] To the concept of regeneration, the Greek words anothen (ἄνωθεν) and anagennao (ἀναγεννάω) can be added. Jesus, while speaking to Nicodemus, said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again [anothen] he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3; cf., John 3:7). The word anothen (ἄνωθεν) generally means “from a source that is above.”[6] That is, from a heavenly source. (At least two English translations, NET & YLT, render the word “from above”). Because Nicodemus confused physical birth with spiritual birth (John 3:4), Jesus clarified His statement, saying, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6). Jesus was talking about spiritual birth, or regeneration, which comes from the source of heaven. Peter used the Greek word anagennao (ἀναγεννάω) when he wrote about Christians who have been “born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” (1 Pet 1:3), and who “have been born again not of seed which is perishable but imperishable, that is, through the living and enduring word of God” (1 Pet 1:23). The basic meaning of anagennao (ἀναγεννάω) is to “beget again, cause to be born again.”[7] In both instances the word denotes imparting new life. This work of the Spirit is directly related to the believer's salvation. According to Walvoord, “The work of regeneration can be assigned to the Holy Spirit as definitely as the work of salvation can be assigned to Christ.”[8]And the believer's new life is the basis for a new walk with the Lord. Ryrie notes, “Regeneration does not make a man perfect, but it places him in the family of God and gives him the new ability to please his Father by growing into the image of Christ. Fruit from the new nature is proof that regeneration has occurred (1 John 2:29).”[9] Lighter states: "The means by which regeneration is accomplished eliminates all human endeavor. Though personal faith in Christ as Savior is necessary, faith does not produce the new life; it does not regenerate. Only God regenerates. Human faith and divine regeneration occur at the same time, but the one is man's responsibility as he is enabled by the Holy Spirit, and the other is the work of God imparting the divine life."[10] Indwelling The indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit for every believer was an innovation that was future from the time of Jesus' ministry on earth. Jesus said, “He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water'” (John 7:38). And John tells us, “But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified” (John 7:39). The Spirit would begin His special ministry on the day of Pentecost, and it would involve His personal indwelling of every believer. Prior to His crucifixion, Jesus spoke of this, saying, “I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you” (John 14:16-17). Notice that Spirit would not only be with them, would be in them. Merrill Tenney writes, “This distinction marks the difference between the Old Testament experience of the Holy Spirit and the post-Pentecostal experience of the church. The individual indwelling of the Spirit is the specific privilege of the Christian believer.”[11] This new indwelling ministry by God the Holy Spirit is different than His work in believers in the OT. Under the Mosaic Law, only a select few received the Holy Spirit (Ex 31:1-5; Num 11:25; 27:18; 1 Sam 16:13), and that was conditioned on His sovereign purposes. But now, in the dispensation of the church age, God the Holy Spirit would personally indwell both the local church (1 Cor 3:16-17), as well as each individual believer (1 Cor 6:19). Paul wrote to the Christians living in Corinth, saying, “Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?” (1 Cor 3:16). Concerning the Spirit's indwelling the church in 1 Corinthians 3:16, Radmacher states: "There are two words translated temple in the NT. One refers to the temple building and all its courts; the other refers strictly to the Most Holy Place where no one but the high priest could go. Paul uses the latter term to describe the local church, in whom God dwells. Unlike 1 Corinthians 6:19, where the word temple refers to the individual believer, and Ephesians 2:21, where the word speaks of the church universal, these verses speak of the local church as God's temple. God takes very seriously our actions in the church. destroy: Any person who disrupts and destroys the church by divisions, malice, and other harmful acts invites God's discipline (1 Cor 11:30-32)."[12] Paul also describes the Spirit's indwelling each Christian in 1 Corinthians 6:19, where he wrote, “do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and that you are not your own?” According to Constable, “Previously Paul taught his readers that the Corinthian church was a temple (naos; 1 Cor 3:16). The believer's body is also a temple. The Holy Spirit is actually indwelling each of these temples (Rom 8:9; cf. Matt 12:6; 18:15–20; 28:16–20; Mark 13:11; John 14:17, 23).”[13] What we find in the church age is that all three Persons of the Godhead indwell every believer (John 14:16-17, 20, 23); however, the Holy Spirit has a special ministry which began on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1:4-5; 2:1-4; 11:15-16; 1 Cor 12:13; Gal 3:26-28), and will continue until the church is raptured to heaven (2 Th 2:7; cf. John 14:1-3; 1 Th 4:13-18; Tit 2:13). Chafer states: "The Spirit made His advent into the world here to abide throughout this dispensation. As Christ is now located at the right hand of the Father, though omnipresent, so the Spirit, though omnipresent, is now locally abiding in the world, in a temple, or habitation, of living stones (Eph 2:19-22). The individual believer is also spoken of as a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 6:19). The Spirit will not leave the world, or even one stone of that building until the age-long purpose of forming that temple is finished…The Spirit came on the Day of Pentecost and that aspect of the meaning of Pentecost will no more be repeated than the incarnation of Christ. There is no occasion to call the Spirit to “come,” for He is here."[14] Baptizing The subject of baptism has been, and continues to be, a subject of confusion. The word baptize is a transliteration of the Greek verb baptizo (βαπτίζω) which broadly means to “plunge, dip, [or] wash,”[15] and is often used “of the Christian sacrament of initiation after Jesus' death.”[16] The Greek noun baptisma (βάπτισμα) refers to the result of a dipping or immersing. In Classical Greek literature, the verb baptizo (βαπτίζω) “was used among the Greeks to signify the dyeing of a garment, or the drawing of water by dipping a vessel into another.”[17] The Greek poet Nicander (ca. 200 B.C.) used both bapto (βάπτω) and baptizo (βαπτίζω) when describing the process of making pickles. According to James Strong, “When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism.”[18]  There are numerous baptisms mentioned in the Bible, some are wet and some are dry. John the Baptist said, “I baptize you with water” (Matt 3:11a), clearly making the baptism wet. But then, John the Baptist spoke of Jesus, saying, “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matt 3:11b). These latter two baptisms are both dry, where no one gets placed into water. A few other baptisms mentioned in Scripture include the baptism of the cross (Mark 10:35-38; Luke 12:50), the baptism of Moses (1 Cor 10:1-2), and the baptism of Christians (Matt 28:16-20). For the Christian, water baptism is a picture of the believer's spiritual union and identification with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection (Rom 6:3-7; Col 2:11-12). Water baptism does not save (1 Cor 1:17). It never has and never will. God saves at the moment believers place their faith solely in Jesus (John 3:16; 1 Cor 15:3-4). At the moment of faith in Christ, God the Holy Spirit unites new believers spiritually to Christ, adding them to the church, the body of Christ. Paul wrote, “For even as the body is one and yet has many members, and all the members of the body, though they are many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit” (1 Cor 12:12-13). Lewis Chafer states, “As a ground upon which the certainty of eternal security rests, the baptism of the Spirit should be recognized as that operation by which the individual believer is brought into organic union with Christ. By the Spirit's regeneration Christ is resident in the believer, and by the Spirit's baptism the believer is thus in Christ.”[19] Merrill F. Unger comments: "This momentous spiritual operation is set forth in the NT as the basis of all the believer's positions and possessions “in Christ” (Eph 1:3; Col 2:10; 3:1–4; etc.). The operation is prophetic in the gospels (Matt 3:11; Mark 1:8; Luke 3:16–17; John 1:33–34, where Christ is the baptizer), historic in the Acts (cf. Acts 1:5 with Acts 11:16), and doctrinal in the epistles (1 Cor 12:13, where the Spirit is named specifically as the agent; Rom 6:3–4; Gal 3:26–27; Col 2:9–12; Eph 4:5). The Spirit's baptizing work, placing the believer “in Christ,” occurred initially at Pentecost at the advent of the Spirit, who baptized believing Jews “into Christ.” In Acts 8, Samaritans were baptized in this way for the first time; in Acts 10, Gentiles likewise were so baptized, at which point the normal agency of the Spirit as baptizer was attained. According to the clear teaching of the epistles, every believer is baptized by the Spirit into Christ the moment he is regenerated. He is also simultaneously indwelt by the Spirit and sealed eternally, with the privilege of being filled with the Spirit, as the conditions for filling are met."[20] Sealing Several times Paul used the Greek verb sphragizo (σφραγίζω) when writing to Christians. Paul wrote of God “who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge” (2 Cor 1:22). To the Christians at Ephesus he wrote, “In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise” (Eph 1:13), and “Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption” (Eph 4:30). In each of these uses the verb sphragizo (σφραγίζω) means “to mark with a seal as a means of identification…so that the mark denoting ownership also carries with it the protection of the owner.”[21] Laney Jr., states, “In ancient times a seal was used as an identifying mark, indicating the rightful ownership of the object sealed. And so the sealing ministry of the Spirit marks believers as God's own possession, guaranteeing their security for eternity.”[22] Concerning Paul's use of sphragizo (σφραγίζω) in Ephesians 1:13, Harold Hoehner comments: "God seals the believers in Christ with the promised Holy Spirit when they have not only heard but also believed the gospel of salvation. The sealing with the Spirit must not be confused with the other ministries of the Spirit. The indwelling of the Spirit refers to his residence in every believer (Rom 8:9; 1 John 2:27). The baptizing ministry of the Spirit places believers into the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13). The filling by the Spirit is the control of the Spirit over believers' lives (Eph 5:18). The sealing ministry of the Spirit is to identify believers as God's own and thus give them the security that they belong to him (Eph 1:13; 4:30; 2 Cor 1:22). The very fact that the Spirit indwells believers is a seal of God's ownership of them."[23] The Holy Spirit is Himself the seal that marks us as owned by God and guarantees our future redemption and glory (Eph 1:13-14; 4:30). These blessings are completely the work of the Holy Spirit for the benefit of Christians and occur at the moment believers trust Jesus as their Savior. These are facts based on objective statements in Scripture and are accepted by faith, not ever-changing subjective feelings. Though Christians can grieve and/or quench the Holy Spirit with personal sin (Eph 4:30; 1 Th 5:19), and though they may suffer divine discipline because of personal sin (Heb 12:5-11), they cannot grieve Him away. Joseph Dillow notes: "The ancient practice of using seals is behind the figurative use of the word here. A seal was a mark of protection and ownership. The Greek word sphragizō is used of a stone being fastened with a seal to “prevent its being moved from a position” (BDAG). In fact, this was apparently the earliest method of distinguishing one's property. The seal was engraved with a design or mark distinctive to the owner. The seal of ownership or protection was often made in soft wax with a signet ring. An impression was left on the wax signifying the owner of the thing sealed. When the Holy Spirit seals us, He presses the signet ring of our heavenly Father on our hearts of wax and leaves the mark of ownership. We belong to Him. He certifies this by His unchangeable purpose to protect and own us to the day of redemption. In Ephesians 1:13-14, we are told that the Holy Spirit Himself is the seal. He is impressed upon us, so to speak. His presence in our lives is thus a guarantee of God's protection and that we are owned by God. A broken seal was an indication that the person had not been protected. The Holy Spirit cannot be broken. He is the seal of ownership. In Ephesians 4:30, we are told that we are sealed unto the day of redemption. This sealing ministry of the Spirit is forever and guarantees that we will arrive safely for the redemption of our bodies and entrance into heaven (Romans 8:23). He is the seal that we are now owned and protected by God until the day of redemption."[24] Dr. Steven R. Cook     [1] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 752. [2] Norman L. Geisler, Systematic Theology, Volume Three: Sin, Salvation (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 2004), 123. [3] Paul P. Enns, The Moody Handbook of Theology (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1989), 338. [4] Charles Caldwell Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Chicago: Moody Press, 1972). [5] David R. Anderson, Free Grace Soteriology, ed. James S. Reitman, Revised Edition. (Grace Theology Press, 2012), 235. [6] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 92. [7] Ibid., 59. [8] John F. Walvoord, The Holy Spirit, 131. [9] Charles Caldwell Ryrie, A Survey of Bible Doctrine (Chicago: Moody Press, 1972). [10] Robert P. Lightner, Handbook of Evangelical Theology: A Historical, Biblical, and Contemporary Survey and Review, 199. [11] Merrill C. Tenney, “John,” in The Expositor's Bible Commentary: John and Acts, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 9, 147. [12] Earl D. Radmacher, Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary, 1464–1465. [13] Tom Constable, Tom Constable's Expository Notes on the Bible (Galaxie Software, 2003), 1 Co 6:18. [14] Lewis S. Chafer, He that is Spiritual (Grand Rapids, Mich. Zondervan Publishing, 1967), 26. [15] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 164. [16] Ibid., 164. [17] W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996), 50. [18] James Strong, βάπτω bapto, Enhanced Strong's Lexicon (Woodside Bible Fellowship, 1995). [19] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, vol. 3, 337. [20] Merrill F. Unger and R.K. Harrison, “Baptism of the Spirit,” The New Unger's Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988). [21] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 980. [22] Charles R. Swindoll and Roy B. Zuck, Understanding Christian Theology (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2003), 206. [23] Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 240. [24] Joseph C. Dillow, Final Destiny: The Future Reign of the Servant Kings, 4th Edition (Houston, TX: Grace Theology Press, 2018).

Disciples Disciple (Reproduce)The Gospel of God: Crown of Thorns and Crown of GoldGospel of God: the promise of the final permanent physical manifestation of God on the earth in sovereign power.Now when he heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew into Galilee...From that time, Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Matt 4:12, 17A baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Luke 3:3What was John PROMISING?This verse may seem to be simple, but it is probably the most difficult verse in the entire Gospel of Mark, not only because of some of the difficult terms but because of the unsuspected complication in the syntax.John had baptized men who confessed their sins so that they might escape judgment. [I. Howard Marshall, The Gospel of Luke: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1978), 136.]In short, John's baptism was a step toward the Promised One's forgiveness.Darrell L. Bock, Luke: 1:1–9:50, vol. 1, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1994), 289.What Shall We Do?Give Evidence of Genuine Repentance:The Crowd – Generosity (clothing and food)Tax Collectors – Honest in Business (Tax Collecting)Soldiers – Content with wages (Extortion and Lying)

This episode is a narration of Dewey Dovel's work titled "The Holy Spirit in Christian Education." Here are the sources for his paper: [1] Steven B. Cowan and James S. Spiegel, The Love of Wisdom: A Christian Introduction to Philosophy (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2009), 1-4. [2] Although the disciplines of philosophy, science, and theology are often seen in conflict with one another, Vern S. Poythress demonstrates how this should not be the case on pages 13-31 of Redeeming Science: A God-Centered Approach (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2006) and pages 13-19 of Redeeming Philosophy: A God-Centered Approach to the Big Questions (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014). [3] “Social Media Statistics Details,” Undiscovered Maine, October 8, 2021, https://umaine.edu/undiscoveredmaine/small-business/resources/marketing-for-small-business/social-media-tools/social-media-statistics-details/. [4] Even secular neurological and psychological studies have disclosed that human cognition is foundational to human experience. Consider the following resource as a sampling of this research: Celeste Kidd and Benjamin Y. Hayden, “The Psychology and Neuroscience of Curiosity,” Neuron 88, no. 3 (November 4, 2015): 449–60. [5] On the basis of recorded human history, Tyrel Eskelson argues for at least 5,000 years of formal education in “How and Why Formal Education Originated in the Emergence of Civilization,” Journal of Education and Learning 9, no. 2 (February 5, 2020): 29–47, https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v9n2p29. [6] A sample of book length treatments teasing out competing methodologies of formal education are Russell Lincoln Ackoff and Daniel A. Greenberg, Turning Learning Right Side Up: Putting Education Back On Track (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, 2016) and James M. Lang, Small Teaching: Everyday Lessons From the Science of Learning (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2021). [7] James N. Anderson, What's Your Worldview?: An Interactive Approach to Life's Big Questions (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014), 69-70. [8] As defined by John M. Frame in A History of Western Philosophy and Theology (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2015): “[Materialism is the belief that] all events can be explained in terms of matter and motion. On this view, there is no immaterial soul. If there is something we can call soul, it is either material (the Stoic view) or an aspect of the body” (10-11). [9] Greg L. Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith, ed. Robert R. Booth (Nacogdoches, TX: Covenant Media Foundation, 2000), 51. [10] George R. Knight, Philosophy & Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2006). 224. [11] Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture references are derived from the New American Standard Bible (1995). Furthermore, this paper is not arguing that it is impossible to attend or work for a secular academic institution and be faithful to one's Christian witness. Rather, this paper is observing that at the philosophical level, secular and Christian academic institutions are operating from fundamentally antithetical presuppositions. By definition, secular academic settings seek a neutral/non-religious stance from the outset of formulating curriculum, hiring staff, etc. On the other hand, Christian academic settings seek a positive religious stance from the outset of formulating curriculum, hiring staff, etc. Yet ironically—given the philosophical impossibility of neutrality—the former approach is not only unable to satisfy its own expressed intentions, but it also necessarily sets itself in opposition to biblical Christianity (e.g., Matt. 12:30; Luke 9:50). Therefore, by virtue of being incompatibile with biblical Christianity, secular educational philosophies should be understood as materializing from the god of this age (2 Cor. 4:4). At bottom, Believers who choose to be immersed into secular educational contexts need to be aware of the preceding antithesis from the outset of their involvement. [12] Although all of the triune God's ad extra works in creation are inseparable, many passages of Scripture will appropriate specific works to one person of the Godhead. For more on the “essence-appropriate”—“persons-appropriate” distinction, see Mark Jones, God Is: A Devotional Guide to the Attributes of God (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2017), 22-23. [13] The inescapability and universality of presuppositions is teased out on page 5 of Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics, ed. William Edgar, 2nd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2003): “Everyone ‘sees' through a lens. There can be no neutrality, because everything in our awareness flows out of some kind of presupposition.” [14] Theologians have historically designated God's revelation in nature as general revelation, and God's revelation in Scripture as special revelation. More expansive definitions of these terms can be found on page 936 of John MacArthur and Richard Mayhue, eds., Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017). [15] Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, ed. K. Scott Oliphint (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2008), 176. [16] Lamenting the state of secular education in “What Shall We Feed Our Children?,” Presbyterian Guardian 3 (1936), Cornelius Van Til calls for the people of God to retrieve a distinctly Christian education: “Our child will certainly attend the grade school for several years and that for five days a week. In Sunday school our child has learned the nineteenth psalm. As he goes to school those beautiful words, ‘The heavens declare the glory of God' still reverberate through his mind. But when he enters the school room all this has suddenly changed. There the ‘starry universe above' somehow operates quite independently of God. And what is true of ‘the heavens above' is true of everything else. At home the child is taught that ‘whether we eat or drink or do anything else' we must do all to the glory of God because everything has been created by God and everything is sustained by God. In school the child is taught that everything comes of itself and sustains itself. This much is involved in the idea of ‘neutrality' itself. At best this means that God need not be brought into the picture when we are teaching anything to our children. But is it not a great sin for Christian parents to have their children taught for five days a week by competent teachers that nature and history have nothing to do with God? We have no moral right to expect anything but that our children will accept that in which they have been most thoroughly instructed and will ignore that about which they hear only intermittently” (23-24). [17] On this point, the axiom “all truth is God's truth” is especially applicable. For insights into the utilization of such an axiom, see Frank E. Gaebelein, The Pattern of God's Truth: Problems of Integration in Christian Education (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1968), 20. [18] In Reformed Dogmatics: Prolegomena, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend, vol. 1, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), Herman Bavinck argues that the “operation of God's Spirit and of his common grace is discernible not only in science and art, morality and law, but also in [false] religions” (317). Hence, the ability for humanity to know any true things in reality is an extension of God's common grace, with a special appropriation to the Holy Spirit's work in creation. [19] These twin truths were championed by the Dutch Reformed Neo-Calvinists of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A sampling of this observation is portrayed in Cory C. Brock and Nathaniel Gray Sutanto, Neo-Calvinism: A Theological Introduction (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2022), 91-92. [20] Upon reflecting on Christian teachers' absolute dependence on the Holy Spirit throughout the educational process, J.T. English offers sage insights in Deep Discipleship: How the Church Can Make Whole Disciples of Jesus (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2020): “There is no path for deep [learning] other than living the Christian life by the power of the Holy Spirit; only he can make us whole again and conform us to the image of the Son. If not for the work of the Holy Spirit, all of our best ministry plans [and efforts] would be laid to nothing” (136). [21] As argued by Stephen Wellum in “From Alpha to Omega: A Biblical-Theological Approach to God the Son Incarnate,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 63, no. 1 (2020): 71–94, the Lord Jesus Christ is both at the center of Scripture and is the goal (telos) of Scripture. [22] By virtue of divine simplicity, and the ensuing doctrine of inseparable operations, the entirety of the Godhead co-equally receives glory through any self-revelation in creation or Scripture. As footnote 12 indicates, “persons-appropriate” language does not undermine the co-equality of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. [23]  Daniel J. Treier's chapter in Christian Dogmatics: Reformed Theology for the Church Catholic, ed. Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016), 216-42 is especially helpful in accentuating the lordship of Christ subsequent to His humiliation and exaltation (e.g., Phil. 2:5-11). [24] James D. Bratt, ed., Abraham Kuyper: A Centennial Reader (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 488. [25] The following excerpt from Joel R. Beeke and Paul M. Smalley, Reformed Systematic Theology: Revelation and God, vol. 1, 3 vols. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019) incisively communicate the unique relationship that Jesus has to God's special revelatory purposes: “Possessing unique intimacy with the Father, the Son is uniquely qualified to make known. Christ is ‘the Word,' the living Revelation of God who has been from the beginning, so that no one has ever known God unless ‘the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father,' has ‘declared him'” (266). [26] See footnotes 12 and 22 for clarifying comments about “persons-appropriate” language in Scripture. [27]  In Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2015), John Calvin unpacks how the Old and New Testament authors were guided by the Holy Spirit to divulge the person and work of Jesus Christ: “If what Christ says is true—‘No one sees the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him' [Matt. 11:27]—surely they who would attain the knowledge of God should always be directed by that eternal Wisdom… Therefore, holy men of old knew God only by beholding him in his Son as in a mirror (cf. 2 Cor. 3:18). When I say this, I mean that God has never manifested himself to men in any other way than through the Son, that is, his sole wisdom, light, and truth. From this fountain Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and others drank all that they had of heavenly teaching” (763). [28] The Holy Spirit's role in bearing witness to the person and work of Christ is summarized on pages 13-14 of Roy B. Zuck, Spirit-Filled Teaching: The Power of the Holy Spirit in Your Ministry (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998). [29] Perhaps the quintessential evidence of global confusion surrounding Christology, and other basic tenets of orthodox Christianity, is encapsulated in the bi-annual State of Theology Survey conducted by Ligonier Ministries and LifeWay Research. To access the results of every survey from its inception in 2014, see “Data Explorer,” The State of Theology, accessed August 30, 2023, https://thestateoftheology.com/. [30]  Chapter 17 (i.e., “The Holy Spirit and Scripture”) of Gregg R. Allison and Andreas J. Köstenberger, The Holy Spirit (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2020), 307-23 supply readers with many helpful insights pertaining to the connection between a believer's reverence for God's written word, and how such a reverence cultivates a posture of submission to Christ's lordship. [31] Although the notion of “thinking God's thoughts after Him” is usually attributed to Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), Jason Lisle provides several practical ways in which believers can “think God's thoughts after Him” on pages 54-61 of The Ultimate Proof of Creation: Resolving the Origins Debate (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2022). [32] The definition recorded for education is a paraphrase of the more expansive definition transcribed in Robert B. Costello, ed., Random House Webster's College Dictionary (New York, NY: Random House, 1992), 425. In the technical sense, this definition is a faithful synopsis of what any education experience will offer. [33] Based on the model of Acts 2:37, Lawrence O. Richards and Gary J. Bredfeldt propose that there are three integral dimensions to imparting divine truth to students (or people in general): (1) cognitive; (2) affective; (3) behavioral. The cognitive dimension pertains to exposing others to truth, the affective dimension alludes to the process whereby one explains how attitudes/values should be impacted by the truth, and the behavioral dimension refers to how a lifestyle should be impacted as a result of embracing the newly discovered truth. Each of these insights documented by Richards and Bredfeldt signify a uniform perspective on the relationship between what one knows intellectually and how one applies that particular data. To access the chapter long treatment of these subjects, see Creative Bible Teaching (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2020), 145-63. [34] Arthur W. Pink, The Holy Spirit (Seaside, OR: Rough Draft Printing, 2016), 107-8. [35] Despite many individuals and institutions who claim the name Christian, and embrace orthodox doctrinal/ideological convictions, an evaluation of their observable lifestyle reveals that they are not Christian in any meaningful (i.e., biblical) sense of the term. Francis Turretin highlights the nature of those who model proper head knowledge, but display no fruit of living it out: “[Unbelievers of this kind possess knowledge that] sticks to the uppermost surface of the soul (to wit, intellect); [but] it does not penetrate to the heart, nor does it have true trust in Christ.” Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George M. Giger, vol. 2, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 1994), 588. [36] This threefold line of argumentation employed throughout the paper has followed this biblically-based template: Knowledge: Christian Education Must be Shaped by Divine Revelation. Righteousness: Christian Education Must be Shaped by the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Holiness: Christian Education Must be Shaped by Holiness of Living. Incidentally, a synonymous line of reasoning is likewise expressed in Question and Answer 13 of the Baptist Catechism: “Question: How did God create man? Answer: God created man, male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, with dominion over the creatures (Gen. 1:26-28; Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24).” An online edition of the Baptist Catechism can be accessed here: “The Baptist Catechism,” Founders Ministries, September 12, 2022, https://founders.org/library/the-baptist-catechism/#:~:text=God%20created%20man%2C%20male%20and,4%3A24).

This episode is a narration of Dewey Dovel's work titled "The Holy Spirit in Christian Education." Here are the sources for his paper: [1] Steven B. Cowan and James S. Spiegel, The Love of Wisdom: A Christian Introduction to Philosophy (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2009), 1-4. [2] Although the disciplines of philosophy, science, and theology are often seen in conflict with one another, Vern S. Poythress demonstrates how this should not be the case on pages 13-31 of Redeeming Science: A God-Centered Approach (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2006) and pages 13-19 of Redeeming Philosophy: A God-Centered Approach to the Big Questions (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014). [3] “Social Media Statistics Details,” Undiscovered Maine, October 8, 2021, https://umaine.edu/undiscoveredmaine/small-business/resources/marketing-for-small-business/social-media-tools/social-media-statistics-details/. [4] Even secular neurological and psychological studies have disclosed that human cognition is foundational to human experience. Consider the following resource as a sampling of this research: Celeste Kidd and Benjamin Y. Hayden, “The Psychology and Neuroscience of Curiosity,” Neuron 88, no. 3 (November 4, 2015): 449–60. [5] On the basis of recorded human history, Tyrel Eskelson argues for at least 5,000 years of formal education in “How and Why Formal Education Originated in the Emergence of Civilization,” Journal of Education and Learning 9, no. 2 (February 5, 2020): 29–47, https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v9n2p29. [6] A sample of book length treatments teasing out competing methodologies of formal education are Russell Lincoln Ackoff and Daniel A. Greenberg, Turning Learning Right Side Up: Putting Education Back On Track (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, 2016) and James M. Lang, Small Teaching: Everyday Lessons From the Science of Learning (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 2021). [7] James N. Anderson, What's Your Worldview?: An Interactive Approach to Life's Big Questions (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2014), 69-70. [8] As defined by John M. Frame in A History of Western Philosophy and Theology (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2015): “[Materialism is the belief that] all events can be explained in terms of matter and motion. On this view, there is no immaterial soul. If there is something we can call soul, it is either material (the Stoic view) or an aspect of the body” (10-11). [9] Greg L. Bahnsen, Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith, ed. Robert R. Booth (Nacogdoches, TX: Covenant Media Foundation, 2000), 51. [10] George R. Knight, Philosophy & Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2006). 224. [11] Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture references are derived from the New American Standard Bible (1995). Furthermore, this paper is not arguing that it is impossible to attend or work for a secular academic institution and be faithful to one's Christian witness. Rather, this paper is observing that at the philosophical level, secular and Christian academic institutions are operating from fundamentally antithetical presuppositions. By definition, secular academic settings seek a neutral/non-religious stance from the outset of formulating curriculum, hiring staff, etc. On the other hand, Christian academic settings seek a positive religious stance from the outset of formulating curriculum, hiring staff, etc. Yet ironically—given the philosophical impossibility of neutrality—the former approach is not only unable to satisfy its own expressed intentions, but it also necessarily sets itself in opposition to biblical Christianity (e.g., Matt. 12:30; Luke 9:50). Therefore, by virtue of being incompatibile with biblical Christianity, secular educational philosophies should be understood as materializing from the god of this age (2 Cor. 4:4). At bottom, Believers who choose to be immersed into secular educational contexts need to be aware of the preceding antithesis from the outset of their involvement. [12] Although all of the triune God's ad extra works in creation are inseparable, many passages of Scripture will appropriate specific works to one person of the Godhead. For more on the “essence-appropriate”—“persons-appropriate” distinction, see Mark Jones, God Is: A Devotional Guide to the Attributes of God (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2017), 22-23. [13] The inescapability and universality of presuppositions is teased out on page 5 of Cornelius Van Til, Christian Apologetics, ed. William Edgar, 2nd ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2003): “Everyone ‘sees' through a lens. There can be no neutrality, because everything in our awareness flows out of some kind of presupposition.” [14] Theologians have historically designated God's revelation in nature as general revelation, and God's revelation in Scripture as special revelation. More expansive definitions of these terms can be found on page 936 of John MacArthur and Richard Mayhue, eds., Biblical Doctrine: A Systematic Summary of Bible Truth (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017). [15] Cornelius Van Til, The Defense of the Faith, ed. K. Scott Oliphint (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2008), 176. [16] Lamenting the state of secular education in “What Shall We Feed Our Children?,” Presbyterian Guardian 3 (1936), Cornelius Van Til calls for the people of God to retrieve a distinctly Christian education: “Our child will certainly attend the grade school for several years and that for five days a week. In Sunday school our child has learned the nineteenth psalm. As he goes to school those beautiful words, ‘The heavens declare the glory of God' still reverberate through his mind. But when he enters the school room all this has suddenly changed. There the ‘starry universe above' somehow operates quite independently of God. And what is true of ‘the heavens above' is true of everything else. At home the child is taught that ‘whether we eat or drink or do anything else' we must do all to the glory of God because everything has been created by God and everything is sustained by God. In school the child is taught that everything comes of itself and sustains itself. This much is involved in the idea of ‘neutrality' itself. At best this means that God need not be brought into the picture when we are teaching anything to our children. But is it not a great sin for Christian parents to have their children taught for five days a week by competent teachers that nature and history have nothing to do with God? We have no moral right to expect anything but that our children will accept that in which they have been most thoroughly instructed and will ignore that about which they hear only intermittently” (23-24). [17] On this point, the axiom “all truth is God's truth” is especially applicable. For insights into the utilization of such an axiom, see Frank E. Gaebelein, The Pattern of God's Truth: Problems of Integration in Christian Education (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1968), 20. [18] In Reformed Dogmatics: Prolegomena, ed. John Bolt, trans. John Vriend, vol. 1, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), Herman Bavinck argues that the “operation of God's Spirit and of his common grace is discernible not only in science and art, morality and law, but also in [false] religions” (317). Hence, the ability for humanity to know any true things in reality is an extension of God's common grace, with a special appropriation to the Holy Spirit's work in creation. [19] These twin truths were championed by the Dutch Reformed Neo-Calvinists of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A sampling of this observation is portrayed in Cory C. Brock and Nathaniel Gray Sutanto, Neo-Calvinism: A Theological Introduction (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Academic, 2022), 91-92. [20] Upon reflecting on Christian teachers' absolute dependence on the Holy Spirit throughout the educational process, J.T. English offers sage insights in Deep Discipleship: How the Church Can Make Whole Disciples of Jesus (Nashville, TN: B & H Publishing Group, 2020): “There is no path for deep [learning] other than living the Christian life by the power of the Holy Spirit; only he can make us whole again and conform us to the image of the Son. If not for the work of the Holy Spirit, all of our best ministry plans [and efforts] would be laid to nothing” (136). [21] As argued by Stephen Wellum in “From Alpha to Omega: A Biblical-Theological Approach to God the Son Incarnate,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 63, no. 1 (2020): 71–94, the Lord Jesus Christ is both at the center of Scripture and is the goal (telos) of Scripture. [22] By virtue of divine simplicity, and the ensuing doctrine of inseparable operations, the entirety of the Godhead co-equally receives glory through any self-revelation in creation or Scripture. As footnote 12 indicates, “persons-appropriate” language does not undermine the co-equality of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. [23]  Daniel J. Treier's chapter in Christian Dogmatics: Reformed Theology for the Church Catholic, ed. Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016), 216-42 is especially helpful in accentuating the lordship of Christ subsequent to His humiliation and exaltation (e.g., Phil. 2:5-11). [24] James D. Bratt, ed., Abraham Kuyper: A Centennial Reader (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1998), 488. [25] The following excerpt from Joel R. Beeke and Paul M. Smalley, Reformed Systematic Theology: Revelation and God, vol. 1, 3 vols. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019) incisively communicate the unique relationship that Jesus has to God's special revelatory purposes: “Possessing unique intimacy with the Father, the Son is uniquely qualified to make known. Christ is ‘the Word,' the living Revelation of God who has been from the beginning, so that no one has ever known God unless ‘the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father,' has ‘declared him'” (266). [26] See footnotes 12 and 22 for clarifying comments about “persons-appropriate” language in Scripture. [27]  In Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2015), John Calvin unpacks how the Old and New Testament authors were guided by the Holy Spirit to divulge the person and work of Jesus Christ: “If what Christ says is true—‘No one sees the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son chooses to reveal him' [Matt. 11:27]—surely they who would attain the knowledge of God should always be directed by that eternal Wisdom… Therefore, holy men of old knew God only by beholding him in his Son as in a mirror (cf. 2 Cor. 3:18). When I say this, I mean that God has never manifested himself to men in any other way than through the Son, that is, his sole wisdom, light, and truth. From this fountain Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and others drank all that they had of heavenly teaching” (763). [28] The Holy Spirit's role in bearing witness to the person and work of Christ is summarized on pages 13-14 of Roy B. Zuck, Spirit-Filled Teaching: The Power of the Holy Spirit in Your Ministry (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998). [29] Perhaps the quintessential evidence of global confusion surrounding Christology, and other basic tenets of orthodox Christianity, is encapsulated in the bi-annual State of Theology Survey conducted by Ligonier Ministries and LifeWay Research. To access the results of every survey from its inception in 2014, see “Data Explorer,” The State of Theology, accessed August 30, 2023, https://thestateoftheology.com/. [30]  Chapter 17 (i.e., “The Holy Spirit and Scripture”) of Gregg R. Allison and Andreas J. Köstenberger, The Holy Spirit (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2020), 307-23 supply readers with many helpful insights pertaining to the connection between a believer's reverence for God's written word, and how such a reverence cultivates a posture of submission to Christ's lordship. [31] Although the notion of “thinking God's thoughts after Him” is usually attributed to Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), Jason Lisle provides several practical ways in which believers can “think God's thoughts after Him” on pages 54-61 of The Ultimate Proof of Creation: Resolving the Origins Debate (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2022). [32] The definition recorded for education is a paraphrase of the more expansive definition transcribed in Robert B. Costello, ed., Random House Webster's College Dictionary (New York, NY: Random House, 1992), 425. In the technical sense, this definition is a faithful synopsis of what any education experience will offer. [33] Based on the model of Acts 2:37, Lawrence O. Richards and Gary J. Bredfeldt propose that there are three integral dimensions to imparting divine truth to students (or people in general): (1) cognitive; (2) affective; (3) behavioral. The cognitive dimension pertains to exposing others to truth, the affective dimension alludes to the process whereby one explains how attitudes/values should be impacted by the truth, and the behavioral dimension refers to how a lifestyle should be impacted as a result of embracing the newly discovered truth. Each of these insights documented by Richards and Bredfeldt signify a uniform perspective on the relationship between what one knows intellectually and how one applies that particular data. To access the chapter long treatment of these subjects, see Creative Bible Teaching (Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers, 2020), 145-63. [34] Arthur W. Pink, The Holy Spirit (Seaside, OR: Rough Draft Printing, 2016), 107-8. [35] Despite many individuals and institutions who claim the name Christian, and embrace orthodox doctrinal/ideological convictions, an evaluation of their observable lifestyle reveals that they are not Christian in any meaningful (i.e., biblical) sense of the term. Francis Turretin highlights the nature of those who model proper head knowledge, but display no fruit of living it out: “[Unbelievers of this kind possess knowledge that] sticks to the uppermost surface of the soul (to wit, intellect); [but] it does not penetrate to the heart, nor does it have true trust in Christ.” Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George M. Giger, vol. 2, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 1994), 588. [36] This threefold line of argumentation employed throughout the paper has followed this biblically-based template: Knowledge: Christian Education Must be Shaped by Divine Revelation. Righteousness: Christian Education Must be Shaped by the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Holiness: Christian Education Must be Shaped by Holiness of Living. Incidentally, a synonymous line of reasoning is likewise expressed in Question and Answer 13 of the Baptist Catechism: “Question: How did God create man? Answer: God created man, male and female, after his own image, in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, with dominion over the creatures (Gen. 1:26-28; Col. 3:10; Eph. 4:24).” An online edition of the Baptist Catechism can be accessed here: “The Baptist Catechism,” Founders Ministries, September 12, 2022, https://founders.org/library/the-baptist-catechism/#:~:text=God%20created%20man%2C%20male%20and,4%3A24).

This is part 19 of the Early Church History class. Even though the Roman Empire chose Nicene Christianity as it's "orthodoxy," subordinationist Christianity continued to exist, especially outside among the Germanic tribes. In this episode, you'll learn about Ulfilas the Missionary to the Goths who not only brought Christianity to these "barbarians," but also made them an alphabet and translated most of the bible into Gothic. Next, we'll briefly survey the major Germanic tribes, including the Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Vandals, Burgundians, Lombards, and finally the Franks. This little known chapter of history when the Arian kingdoms took over the Roman Empire had a massive effects on Europe and North Africa for centuries to come. Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP9T3V1AWIs&list=PLN9jFDsS3QV2lk3B0I7Pa77hfwKJm1SRI&index=19&t=27s&pp=iAQB —— Links —— See also 494 Early Church History 12: Arius and Alexander of Alexandria and 423 One God 13: The Fourth Century More Restitutio resources on Christian history See other classes here Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here —— Notes —— Ulfilas, Missionary to the Goths 340 Subordinationist bishops ordained Ulfilas bishop to the Visigoths 341-347 lived with the Goths and preached to them Ulfilas translated the Bible into Gothic. Rule of Faith: “I believe in one God the Father, alone ingenerate and invisible, and in his only-begotten Son, our Lord and God, artificer and maker of the whole creation, who has nobody like him–therefore there is one God the Father of all who is also God of our God–and in one Holy Spirit, the power which illuminates and sanctifies, as Christ said after the resurrection to his apostles, and he (i.e. the Spirit) is not God nor our God, but the minister of Christ ... subordinate and obedient in all things to the Son, and the Son subordinate and obedient in all things to his God and Father…”[1] Huns The Huns were a nomadic confederation of Mongolian tribes who began entering Europe in the fourth century. Ammianus Marcellinus described them as utter savages who never bathed or changed their clothes and lived on their horses. Atilla the Hun (r. 434-453) attacked Persia, the Balkans, Constantinople, Gaul, and Italy, terrifying many within the Roman Empire (both East and West). Visigoths Eudoxius, Bishop of Constantinople (r. 360-370) succeeding in establishing communion with Visigoths Eudoxius was an Anomean (Heteroousian) like Eunomius 376 Visigoths petitioned the emperor to enter the Roman Empire. Permission was granted, but local Roman leaders badly mistreated the Visigoths. 377 Visigoths rebelled. 378 Visigoths defeated and killed Emperor Valens at the Battle of Adrianople. 410 Alaric sacked and looted Rome. 418 Visigoths settled in Gaul, then Spain 589 Visigoths converted to Catholicism at the Council of Toledo. Ostrogoths 453 Atilla the Hun died, resulting in rebellion against the Huns. 476 Odoacer removed the last western Roman Augustus from power (Romulus Augustulus). 488-493 Byzantine Emperor Zeno asked Theodoric and Ostrogoths to conquer Italy and rule as his client. 493 Theodoric and Ostrogoths began ruling Italy as Arians over Roman Catholics. 535 Byzantine Emperor Justinian conquered Ostrogoths and retook Italy. Vandals 406 The Vandals crossed into Gaul, then into Spain in 409. Rome instigated the Visigoths (also in Spain) to attack the Vandals. 419 More Vandals came into Spain. 426 Vandals began raiding North Africa. 428 Under Gaiseric, 80,000 Vandals crossed the Strait of Gibraltar. 430 They conquered most of North Africa (Mauretania). Gaiseric was a devoted Arian who pillaged Catholic churches. The Vandals ruled North Africa for a century over the Roman Catholics. 455 They reinvaded Spain and Italy, sacking Rome. 533 Byzantine Emperor Justinian conquered the Vandals and retook North Africa. Burgundians 451 Arian Burgundians fought Atilla the Hun on behalf of Rome. 470 Migrated to Gaul and took Lyons 532 Franks defeated Burgundians, absorbing them. Lombards 568 Audoin the Lombard recruited a massive army made up of several barbarian tribes and invaded Italy. 574 Lombards split Italy into 30+ regions under the command of dukes (duces). Lombard kings were Arian from 6th century until Adaloald in 615 By late 7th century, the Lombards became Roman Catholics. Franks Childeric I (r. 457-481) began uniting Frankish tribes. Clovis I (r. 481-511) killed his rivals and became sole king of the Franks, establishing the Merovingian dynasty, which lasted until 751. Chlotild, the wife of Clovis I, was a Roman Catholic who tried to convince Clovis to become a Christian. 496 In a war with the Alamanni, he was losing and prayed to Christ for military victory. After he won, he and 3,000 from his army converted. Joseph Lynch: “The Franks turned out to be the toughest barbarians.”[2] The Franks flourished until the eighth century and were the ancestors of modern France, Germany, Italy, Holland, and Belgium. Review Subordinationist Bishop Ulfilas went on a mission to preach Christ to the Goths in the middle of the fourth century. Ulfilas invented a Gothic alphabet and translated the Bible into their language, sparking a movement that eventually led to the conversion of most of the Germanic tribes to Arian Christianity. When hordes of fierce Huns migrated West into Europe, Gothic tribes began migrating into the Roman Empire. Under Alaric, the Arian Visigoths conquered much of the Italian peninsula and even sacked Rome in 410 before migrating to Gaul and Spain. In the fifth century, Arian Ostrogoths under Theodoric conquered Italy and established themselves as a ruling class over the Trinitarian Romans there. In the fifth century, Arian Vandals conquered Spain then migrated to North Africa where they ruled for a century until the time of Justinian. In the fifth century, Arian Burgundians conquered and occupied Gaul until the Franks absorbed them in the sixth century. In the sixth century, Arian and Pagan Lombards conquered much of Italy, but converted to Trinitarian Catholicism in the seventh century. In the late fifth century, Clovis I, king of the Franks, converted from paganism to Trinitarian Christianity, eventually extending influence over surrounding Germanic tribes. From the fourth to the seventh centuries, Germanic tribes who held to Arian Christianity invaded and conquered much of the western Roman Empire, but either faced defeat by Justinian or else converted to Roman Catholicism. [1] Auxentius, Letter of Auxentius in R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for a Christian Doctrine of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic 2007), 105. [2] Joseph Lynch, Early Christianity (New York: Oxford, 2010), 234.

This is part 12 of the Early Church History class. Today we begin a two part series on the Christological controversies of the fourth century. Our focus for this episode is the conflict between Alexander, bishop of Alexandria, and his presbyter, Arius. You may be surprised to learn that Arius was not some youthful outsider spouting off obvious heresy. Rather than depending on what modern historians and biased apologists say, we'll depend on ancient historians and the surviving letters from Arius, Alexander, and Constantine to reconstruct what really happened. You may be surprised what we find. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3BFihtpvP2o&list=PLN9jFDsS3QV2lk3B0I7Pa77hfwKJm1SRI&index=12 Listen to this episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts —— Links —— See other episodes and posts about Arius More Restitutio resources on Christian history See other classes here Support Restitutio by donating here Join our Restitutio Facebook Group and follow Sean Finnegan on Twitter @RestitutioSF Leave a voice message via SpeakPipe with questions or comments and we may play them out on the air Intro music: Good Vibes by MBB Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-SA 3.0) Free Download / Stream: Music promoted by Audio Library. Who is Sean Finnegan?  Read his bio here —— Notes —— Bishop Alexander of Alexandria (bishop from 313-326) Authoritarian bishop (in the steps of Demetrius 80 years prior) Called together a meeting of clergy wherein “with perhaps too philosophical minuteness”[1], he explained the unity of the Father and the Son. Arius of Libya (260-336) Presbyter of ancient Baucalis Church in Alexandria Austere, ascetic, older man Highly intelligent and an expert logician Objected to Alexander's teaching about the unity of the Father and the Son, thinking it sounded like Sabellianism Investigation Alexander held two rounds of debates among clergy in which Arius participated. Alexander found both sides convincing but ended up siding with the eternal Son position. Alexander held a council of bishops and requested Arius to sign a confession of faith. Arius denied; Alexander excommunicated him 89 others left with Arius. Letter Wars Alexander wrote letters to other bishops against Arius. Alexander wrote an encyclical against Arius. Arius wrote letters looking for support. Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesarea had Arius write a conciliatory letter to Alexander. Constantine wrote Alexander a letter which requested him to make peace with Arius. Arius' Theology Word/Son is first created being (before the ages) He is superior to all other created beings and objects. “There was when he was not.” God begat/created Christ out of nothing. Arius' Thalia[2]“According to the faith of the chosen ones of God, the knowledgeable children of God, the holy orthodox ones who have received the Spirit of the holy God, I have learnt these things from those who share wisdom, smart people, taught of God and wise in every way; in the steps of these I have come, I going along with them, I, the well-known, who have suffered much for the glory of God, who have learnt wisdom from God, and I know knowledge.”[3] “God then himself is in essence ineffable to all. He alone has neither equal nor like, none comparable in glory; We call him Unbegotten because of the one in nature begotten; We raise hymns to him as Unbegun because of him who has a beginning. We adore him as eternal because of the one born in time. The Unbegun appointed the Son to be Beginning of things begotten, and bore him as his own Son, in this case giving birth. He has nothing proper to God in his essential property, for neither is he equal nor yet consubstantial with him.”[4] Escalation 321 - Council in Bythinia (Eusebius of Nicomedia) 322 - Council in Alexandria (Alexander) 324 - Council in Alexandria (Hosius) 325 - Council in Antioch (Hosius) 325 - Council in Nicea (Constantine) Review Bishop Alexander of Alexandria began teaching that the Son of God was eternal. Presbyter Arius objected, teaching instead that because the Son of God was begotten, there was a time when he was not. After multiple debates, Alexander held a council and insisted Arius sign his confession or face excommunication. Arius refused. When Alexander ejected Arius from the churches in Alexandria, 89 others left with him, including clergy. Eusebius of Nicomedia and Eusebius of Caesarea tried to convince Alexander to reinstate Arius. Alexander wrote letters to bishops around the world, warning them not to accept Arius or those who believed like him. Although both Alexander and Arius were subordinationists, Alexander believed God was only greater than his Son in that he was unbegun, though both were eternal. Arius believed God's begetting of the Son was a creative act, though the Son was still supreme over every other creature. Arius did not invent the idea that the Son had a beginning, but his distinctive insistence that the Son was made from nothing (instead of from God) was new. Alexander's heavy-handed tactics polarized churches on this issue, resulting in emperor Constantine's involvement. [1] Socrates, Ecclesiastical History 1.5-6. [2] Thalia means abundance in Greek. [3] Beginning paragraph of Thalia cited from Athanasius, Orationes contra Arianos 1.5-6 in R. P. C. Hanson, The Search for a Christian Doctrine of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), 12. [4] Athanasius, On the Synods of Arminium and Seleucia 15, trans. Stuart Hall in A New Eusebius, ed. J. Stevenson, rev. ed. (London: SPCK, 2013), 374-5.

In chapter 16 of the book of Acts, the narrator switches from using the third person to the first person plural. Why does he do that? Works Cited C.K. Barrett, Acts: A Shorter Commentary (London: T&T Clark, 2002), xxiv. William Sanger Campbell, The "We" Passages of the Acts of the Apostles: The Narrator as Narrative Character (Atlanta: SBL Press, 2007), 87-91. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 3.14.1. Translation taken from The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1957). Mikeal Parsons, Acts, Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 238-240.

     The Bible teaches God has assigned a limited amount of time for us to live in this world. David wrote, “in Your book were all written the days that were ordained for my life when as yet there was not one of them” (Psa 139:16). Job said a person's “days are determined, the number of his months is with You” (Job 14:5). And David said, “LORD, make me to know my end and what is the extent of my days; let me know how transient I am” (Psa 39:4). Paul said, “God made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation (Act 17:26). How we use our time is a matter of personal choice.        Concerning our use of time, Paul wrote, “Be careful how you walk, not as unwise men but as wise, making the most of your time, because the days are evil” (Eph 5:15-16). Paul starts this instruction with the Greek verb βλέπω blepo, which the NASB translates as be careful. The Greek word basically denotes perception with the eye, but here refers to one's mental state of alertness which, according to Louw & Nida, means “to be ready to learn about future dangers or needs, with the implication of preparedness to respond appropriately, to beware of, to watch out for, to pay attention to.”[1] The form of the verb is present tense, active voice, and imperative mood. This means our being alert is to be an ongoing action, is produced by the Christian, and is a directive to be obeyed by faith.      Specifically, we are to be mindful of how we walk in this world. The word walk translates the Greek verb περιπατέω peripateo which is a metaphor for conduct. As Christians, we are to walk, “not as unwise men but as wise.” To walk unwisely (ἄσοφος asophos) is a possibility for any Christian, otherwise the statement is superfluous. The adjective, ἄσοφος asophos, according to BDAG, refers to “one who lacks the power of proper discernment, unwise, foolish.”[2] The fool is not necessarily one who does not reason, but reasons wrongly. He lacks God's Word as a reference point for reality and divine viewpoint. But we are to be wise (σοφός sophos), which denotes operating from divine viewpoint. As Christians, we are to possess and operate by the revelation of God's Word which gives us insights into realities we could never know, except that God has spoken, and His Word directs every aspect of our lives (i.e., marriage, family, friends, work, finances, etc.). When we operate by divine viewpoint, we will prioritize our lives in such a way that God is glorified, others are edified, and we are sanctified. By living this way, we are “making the most” of our time, knowing “the days are evil.” The work making translates the Greek verb ἐξαγοράζω exagorazo, which is a commercial term that denotes purchasing an item from a market. Grant Osborne states, “The verb is a commercial metaphor used for purchasing a commodity, and it implies a period of vigorous trading while there is profit to be made…Here the intention is that we will use our time wisely, making every opportunity count.”[3] And the form of the verb is in the present tense and middle voice. The present tense implies ongoing action, and the middle voice means we exercise our volition in such a way that we participate in the action and benefit from it. And what we are to regard as a precious commodity is time, which translates the Greek word καιρός kairos, which here denotes opportunities God places in our path. The same word is used elsewhere by Paul, who wrote, “Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity [καιρός kairos]” (Col 4:5). And in Galatians he wrote, “So then, while we have opportunity [καιρός kairos], let us do good to all people, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith” (Gal 6:10). And why must we be so careful about the opportunities God provides? Paul's answer was, “because the days are evil” (Eph 5:16b). Living in a fallen world means evil is always around us, seeking to draw us away from God and the stable ground of His Word. As Christians, we are to be on the alert, because evil people and spiritual traps abound. And believers who are ignorant of God's Word and/or not paying attention to their activities become soft-targets for Satan's forces.[4] Concerning the evil days, Harold Hoehner states: "The days are evil because they are controlled by the god of this age (Eph 2:2) who opposes God and his kingdom and who will try to prevent any opportunities for the declaration of God's program and purposes. Hence, in this present evil age believers are not to waste opportunities because this would be useless and harmful to God's kingdom and to those who are a part of it…It is interesting to notice that he is not recommending that they fear the present evil age or avoid interaction with it. Rather his exhortation is to walk wisely in the evil days by seizing every opportunity. Unrelenting warfare exists between the God of heaven and the god of this age. In essence, believers are commanded not to let the god of this age intimidate them, but to take advantage of every opportunity in this immoral environment to live a life that pleases God (cf. Gal 2:10)."[5]      As Christians, we will face ongoing worldly distractions which are designed by Satan to prevent spiritual growth and hinder our impact for God in this world. As God's children, we have choices to make on a daily basis, sometimes moment by moment, for only we can choose to allow these distractions to stand between us and the Lord. We must be disciplined with the time and opportunities God gives us, learning His Word and living by faith so that we can advance to spiritual maturity and serve as lights in a dark world (Eph 5:8-10). Every moment is precious and we must make sure our days are not wasted on meaningless pursuits, but on learning God's Word, living His will, and loving those whom the Lord places in our path.   [1] Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), 332. [2] William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 144. [3] Grant R. Osborne, Ephesians: Verse by Verse, Osborne New Testament Commentaries (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2017), 178. [4] This principle is true to life, for enemy forces on the battlefield, or criminals in the city, look for soft targets they can exploit for their own agenda. Knowing the enemy is present, understanding his tactics, maintaining personal preparedness and staying alert, makes you a hard-target which mitigates injury. [5] Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 694–695.

Rethinking Scripture PodcastEpisode 58: Acts 16-17 - What Must I Do to Be Saved?October 29, 2022 - Host: Dr. Gregory HallIn Acts 16-17 Paul and his traveling companions hit the road. These chapters record some of the events in his second missionary journey… and they are packed full of interesting topics. In this episode we discuss circumcision, baptism, a python spirit, and the very important question asked by a jailer, “What must I do to be saved?”Resources Referenced and/or Read:Moyer V. Hubbard, “Greek Religion,” in The World of the New Testament: Cultural, Social, and Historical Contexts, ed. Joel B. Green and Lee Martin McDonald (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 110.Deppe, Dean B. All Roads Lead to the Text: Eight Methods of Inquiry into the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2011. Print.Harwood, E. A Liberal Translation of the New Testament. Vol. I & II. London: T. Becket and P. A. de Hondt; J. Johnson; T. Cadell; J. Gore and J. Sibbald; T. Bancks, 1768.Show Music:Intro/Outro - "Growth" by Armani Delos SantosTransition Music - produced by Jacob A. HallPodcast Website:The All-America Listener Challenge Updates: https://rethinkingscripture.comMy New Podcast Studio... The Upper Room: https://rethinkingscripture.com/podcast-episodes/More information about The Homes and Help Initiative: https://rethinkingscripture.com/homes-help-initiative/Sister site: RethinkingRest.comRethinking Rest... the Book: Coming January 19, 2023!More information about the book: https://rethinkingrest.com/the-book/Social Media:Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/RethinkingScripture Twitter: @RethinkingStuffInstagram: Rethinking_ScriptureYouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6YCLg2UldJiA0dsg0KkvLAPowered and distributed by Simplecast.

Bible Study with Jairus - 1 Corinthians 12   Spiritual Gifts: the loving gift of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit   Spiritual gifts express the unified, loving work of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. First Corinthians 12 is the only chapter in the Bible that gives this many details about the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Paul's mention of the gift supports and expounds on the theme of 1 Corinthians: love and unity.   In the book of 1 Corinthians, Paul has been addressing many reasons for division, dealing with each of these problems one by one. Paul wants to address the lack of unity and bring love and oneness back to the church. Neither factions, differences in belief, or differences in gifts should keep believers from unity and love. Paul tries to make it clear that love and unity are the only solutions to strife.   As he does so, Paul demonstrates that spiritual gifts are the joint work of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity works together in love and unity, setting an example for the believers. We should balance our pursuit of gifts with our desire for unity.[1]   The theme of 1 Corinthians is love and unity   How does the theme of spiritual gifts fit into the context? Why is it positioned directly between the passage on head coverings and the Lord's Supper and the passage about Christ's body in Chapter 12? The discussion of spiritual gifts and the metaphor of Christ's body all relate to the theme of unity.   Let's remember that the theme of 1 Corinthians is love and unity. Paul knows that many topics threaten the unity of the church: whether or not to eat meat, how to understand sexual morality, how to avoid classism at the Lord's supper, factions, and attitudes towards spiritual gifts. Each of these issues has caused disagreement among the believers. Paul tackles these problems one at a time.   Paul wants believers to bear with one another and be united in love—whether they eat meat or not, whether married or not, whether they eat the Lord's Supper together or not. His top priority was to keep others from stumbling. In the same way, this chapter continues Paul's train of thought. No matter how different our gifts are, it shouldn't be an excuse for a disagreement. Although our gifts are different, we are still members of the same body, and we need to live in unity.   The book of Romans contains Paul's systematic thinking on theology, demonstrating his theologian side. Meanwhile, 1 Corinthians is Paul's pastoral letter to the church, showing his pastoral heart.[2] Although Paul talks about different issues in 1 Corinthians, they are not random. Paul appeals to the believers, asking them not to be puffed up in favor of one against another (1 Corinthians 4:6). He wants them to remember that every gift we have is from God, so we have nothing to boast about (1 Corinthians 4:7). Chapter 5 deals with sexual immorality. Even sexual immorality can lead to division. Some believe in sexual license and others want to completely abstain (Chapter 7). The Corinthian believers were having disagreements about this issue. Chapter 6 deals with lawsuits among brothers, the day-to-day disagreements that fester among Christians. Paul calls the believers to settle their disputes (1 Corinthians 6:5). Food sacrificed to idols. In chapter 8, Paul talks about eating foods sacrificed to idols. He says, "We are no worse off if we do not eat, and no better off if we do." (1 Corinthians 8:8).[3] If food makes others stumble, Paul said he would never again eat meat (1 Corinthians 8:13). Food should not be a cause of division. Instead, we should consider the feelings of others and try to live in love and unity. Head coverings. In 1 Corinthians 11, the discussion of head coverings and the Lord's Supper shows that we should consider the feelings of others and not humiliate them if they are poor. Instead of honoring the Lord at Communion, "one goes hungry, another gets drunk." (1 Corinthians 11:21). This not only dishonors the Lord, but also destroys the spirit of unity and love.   Chapter 12's discussion of spiritual gifts follows logically in the same pattern. It continues the discussion of love and unity. Since different attitudes towards spiritual gifts have led to divisions within the church, Paul needed to expound the truth about spiritual gifts to bring believers into oneness.   This theme continues in the following chapters. Chapter 13's beautiful description of love forms a centerpiece between many topics of disunity. In Chapter 14, Paul continues to deal with the disunity caused by the practice of speaking in tongues and prophecy. He shows the believers how to embody love and unity in these situations. Paul was not against eating meat, but in order to keep others from stumbling, he did not eat meat. Paul was also not against speaking in tongues, but in order not to keep others from stumbling, he would rather not speak in tongues in church meetings (1 Corinthians 14:19).   As a side note, many people have misunderstood Paul's intention in this passage. They think he is against speaking in tongues. Actually, he is not. He is temporarily giving up speaking in tongues in meetings for the sake of unity. But in private, he speaks in tongues more than everyone else (1 Corinthians 14:18).   In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul talks about the resurrected Christ, and in 1 Corinthians 16, he gives some final exhortations to the Corinthian church. From beginning to end, Paul was helping the Corinthian believers break free from division and embrace a spirit of love and unity.   When we fail to notice Paul's themes of love and unity in 1 Corinthians, this discussion of spiritual gifts may seem unexpected. However, it's not at all unexpected for him to talk about spiritual gifts in 1 Corinthians 12. The entire book follows a consistent theme: he is dealing with each specific problem that leads to disunity among believers.   In order for the Corinthian believers to bear with each other and maintain unity in love, Paul needs to deal with every problem that is causing disunity. After talking about spiritual gifts, Paul appeals to the metaphor of the body. He uses the example of the human body to show that although we have different gifts, we are still important members of the body of Christ. Just as the body has many parts but is one body, the church has many gifts but must live in unity.   No spiritual gift has caused as much division in the church as the gift of tongues and the word of knowledge. Let's look at these two topics as we learn about divisions, love, and unity. Then let's examine the ways that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit work together in love and in unity in the area of spiritual gifts. As believers, let's imitate the example of the Triune God, living in love and unity as we exercise our unique spiritual gifts.   The Gift of Tongues Some Charismatic teachers teach that the gift of speaking and interpreting in tongues is different than praying in tongues (1 Corinthians 12:10). What's the difference between the two? One is the prayer language received from God which allows you to utter mysteries to God after being baptized by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 14:2). But 1 Corinthians 12:10 says that to one person is given “various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues." In addition, 1 Corinthians 12:30 says, "Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?" The gift of tongues and interpretation of tongues is considered a miraculous gift or a special office in the church.   For example, I was baptized by the Holy Spirit in 2015 and started speaking in tongues. Since praying in tongues can build up believers (1 Corinthians 14:4) in their faith (Jude 1:20), I continue to pray in tongues every day. But I have never had the gift or office of speaking in tongues and interpreting tongues in church. A few years ago, when I attended a prophetic meeting, an American lady prophesied to me that one day, I would be able to see angels and understand people who are speaking in tongues. If God led me to minister in churches where people were speaking in tongues, I would be able to understand the messages that were spoken in tongues and use this knowledge to understand what the Holy Spirit had to say about these churches. As expected, not long after, I began to see angels in prophetic dreams. But so far, I have never understood what others were saying when they were speaking in tongues. If I can actually understand them one day, it will be a miraculous gift. I am still waiting for God to activate this spiritual gift in me.   Brother Witness Lee of the Local Church Movement once learned to speak in tongues for two years. But later, Watchman Nee sent him a telegram quoting the verse that says, "Do all speak in tongues?" The purpose of the message was to oppose Brother Witness Lee's continued pursuit of spiritual gifts. Later, Brother Witness Lee gave up spiritual gifts and became opposed to them.   Based on my explanation above, Watchman Nee may have confused "the prayer language of believers praying in tongues" with "the gift and office of speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues." Not everyone has the "gift and office of speaking in tongues and interpretation of tongues." But every believer can have "the prayer language of speaking in tongues." Many Christians, misunderstanding Paul's words, are opposed to the practice of building oneself up through praying in tongues. This is wrong. Brother Witness Lee may not have been able to enter into the real experience of praying in tongues when he was learning about spiritual gifts and speaking in tongues. Thus, he later became opposed to both. This is a real pity.   A Different Understanding of the Word of Knowledge   In the Pentecostal Movement, the miraculous information a believer receives is called the "word of knowledge.” For example, the Lord Jesus knew that the Samaritan woman had five husbands (John 4:18) and that Nathanael was under the fig tree (John 1:50). He also knew Zacchaeus' name without anyone telling Him (Luke 19:5). Some say this is because He is the Lord, so He knows everything. This explanation is untenable. Many people in the Pentecostal Movement also have this gift. They call it the "word of knowledge."   The "word of knowledge" is often used in conjunction with prophecy and healing. For example, I was prophesying in a meeting while I was studying prophecy. A man came to me to receive prayer. Suddenly, I saw a picture in my head. In the vision, he was beating a drum. I asked him if he had a career in music. He said yes, and I asked him again if he was a drummer. He said yes. I boldly prophesied to him that God would bless his music ministry.   A woman who was traveling with him immediately fell to the ground and cried. The man said, "You really can hear the voice of the Holy Spirit." Later, I found out that their worship team had encountered some difficulties while serving in their church. This was why they came to receive prayer. My words encouraged them.   Such knowledge is often referred to as the "word of knowledge" in the Pentecostal Movement. Brother Witness Lee also described a similar experience in his writings. He unknowingly said in a meeting, "Someone stole a chalk and use it to draw circles on the ground."[4] The brother who had done this immediately repented and received salvation. These examples are often referred to as the "word of knowledge" in the Pentecostal Movement.   What is the "word of wisdom"? Usually it refers to the word of wisdom received from God under very difficult circumstances to resolve specific problems. For example, when two prostitutes were fighting over a child, King Solomon received the word of wisdom to divide the child in two, so that each woman would receive half. As a result, the real mother was distinguished from the fake (1 Kings 3).   Many similar examples happened to the Lord Jesus. For example, a woman who was caught in adultery by the scribes and Pharisees was brought to Jesus. They wanted to test Jesus and look for a reason to accuse Him. If Jesus said not to stone her, he would violate the Law of Moses; if Jesus said to stone her, it would mean He would kill and show no mercy. Jesus received a word of wisdom. He said, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” (John 8:7). At this point, the accusers left. This word of wisdom resolved the crisis.   Brother Witness Lee had a similar experience. When he was caught by the Japanese military police, they knew that he often mentioned the word "revival" in meetings. For this reason, they thought he was related to the revolutionary party and hoped to get some information from him. Brother Witness Lee prayed that God would give him wisdom. During the interrogation, he told the Japanese that the "revival" he was talking about was the spiritual revival of the church and had nothing to do with politics. The Japanese military police picked up a Bible that Witness Lee had given him and said, "Show me the word ‘revival' in the Bible.” Witness Lee opened the Bible to a random page. And the page he opened happened to be Habakkuk 3:2, which says, "O Lord, revive Your work in the midst of the years." The Japanese military police were surprised and released him. According to the beliefs of the Pentecostal Movement, God gave him a word of wisdom at that moment.[i][5]   Let's look again at the footnotes of the Recovery Version. "The word of wisdom is the word concerning Christ as the deeper things of God, predestined by God to be our portion. The word of knowledge is the word that imparts a general knowledge of things concerning God and the Lord. The word of wisdom is mainly out of our spirit through revelation; the word of knowledge is mainly out of our understanding through teachings."   I personally think this footnote's interpretation of the "word of wisdom" and the "word of knowledge" is wrong, or at least biased. The reason for this comes from a lack of knowledge and experience of the gift of the Holy Spirit. This footnote attempts to explain these concepts within the scope of preaching and mental understanding, neglecting the fact that these words of wisdom and knowledge are miraculous gifts. When we lack knowledge and experience of a miraculous gift, we limit our understanding of this biblical knowledge or gift, leading us to wrong conclusions and interpretations.   Many people, including Pastor Stephen Tang, are against treating the "word of knowledge" as a miraculous message, especially when it involves healing from a certain disease. He also believes that "when a person preaches the word of God with great power, the knowledge and wisdom they are filled with are the words of wisdom and knowledge.”[6] But I personally think that Pastor Stephen Tang also lacks the experiential knowledge of spiritual gifts, so he explains these concepts mentally and rationally. I have personally observed many times that God has used the word of knowledge to heal the sick, make prophecies, etc. For this reason, I lean more towards accepting the explanation that this is a miraculous gift that releases a miraculous message from God.   The two examples I gave, speaking in tongues and the word of knowledge, illustrate a common source of division. There are different understandings of spiritual gifts in the modern church which lead to divisions in the church. The Corinthian believers must have also struggled with different understandings or even disagreements over spiritual gifts. Each of them had different gifts, and they were struggling with unity. This is why Paul clarifies the topic of spiritual gifts. He wants the believers to transcend their differences. Even though they each had different spiritual gifts and different understandings of the concept of spiritual gifts, they should work to achieve oneness in love.   Spiritual gifts are a picture of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit working in unity   Verse 1 of this chapter mentions that Paul does not want the believers in Corinth to be uninformed about spiritual gifts. In verse four, he mentions spiritual gifts. Between these verses, he inserts two verses about the Holy Spirit and idolatry. What do these verses mean? Let's read them: "When you were pagans you were led astray to mute idols, however you were led. Therefore, I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says ‘Jesus is accursed!' and no one can say ‘Jesus is Lord' except in the Holy Spirit.” (vs. 2-3)   Why are these two verses inserted here? My guess is that some magical powers come from evil spirits. For example, the Bible records that people were amazed by Simon, who practiced magic (Acts 8:9). Perhaps some Corinthian believers were against spiritual gifts because they reminded them of magic. For example, many traditional American churches today are against meditation prayers and the gift of prophecy because the New Age movement contains meditation, fortune-telling, and divination. Similarly, this may have been one of the arguments Paul was dealing with among the believers. Paul made it clear that the gifts he was talking about were from the Holy Spirit and of the Lord Jesus Christ.   He further clarifies in verse 4 that although gifts come from the Holy Spirit, the Lord Jesus and the Heavenly Father also share in the process of bestowing gifts. Verses 4-6 say, "Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone." The Holy Spirit has given us different gifts; the Lord has given us different kinds of service; the Father has given us different activities. The three operate in unity to finish God's work. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit work together in love.   How can we understand this? I'll give an example. My ministry, "Jairus Bible World Ministries," is a call from God. The Lord appeared to me and called me to take part in this ministry. My calling was mainly to preach God's word and make His words come alive. When the Lord appeared to me, He Himself told me that He would use me greatly.   The Holy Spirit also gave me gifts in the form of dreams. One day, I dreamed that I got a Bible from heaven that was as sweet as bread. While I am teaching His word, I have found that the Holy Spirit often gives me the gift of understanding God's words and being an eloquent speaker. When I use this gift and release the illumination of God's word, I am empowered by God the Father. The result of using these gifts is to glorify God the Father, because all things are of Him.     This gift is not just bestowed on me by the Holy Spirit. Jesus and the Father are also taking part in it at the same time. The Holy Spirit bestows a gift on me, and the Lord Jesus perfects it. The gift of the Holy Spirit helps me accomplish the ministry Jesus called me to. And the good work in my heart and in the ministry, all come from the Father. As Philippians 2:13 says, “For it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.” Father, Son, and Holy Spirit work in unity.   The modern church has differing views of gifts. These differences of opinion can lead to church divisions. Some people think that spiritual gifts are not from God, or that they are small things that He does not care about. Paul corrects this wrong view in verses 2-3. He says that spiritual gifts come from the Holy Spirit. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are involved in giving us gifts and ministries, as well as empowering our activities.   In addition, the Corinthian believers may have thought that their gifts were superior or inferior to those of others, resulting in competition. Paul explains that we have different gifts, but they are all given to us by the same Spirit. We have different types of service, but we all serve the same Lord. Our activities are different but it is the same God who empowers them all.   The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are working together in unity to empower these activities, services, and gifts. In the same way, we must respect each other's gifts which are given by the Holy Spirit, ministries given by the Lord Jesus, and activities given by the Father. We must learn from the example of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, who are working together in love and in unity. Paul takes this opportunity to make it clear that although our gifts are different, they should not bring division. Rather, they should bring unity.   Inspirations for achieving oneness in today's church   Today's church not only has differing opinions about spiritual gifts, but it also disagrees about politics and Covid-19 vaccines. The division in the church today is even more serious than that of the Corinthian church. Is there a way out of these divisions?   Paul points the way in 1 Corinthians: unity and love. There are different kinds of disagreements in the church, and unity and love are the only way out. Paul's words of wisdom are as applicable today as when they were first written. No matter how many disagreements the church faces, there is only one answer. And that is to bear with each other in unity and love. This approach worked in the Corinthian church, and it should work in the church today. Are our spiritual eyes open to see the way Paul has laid out? Will we choose to live according to the flesh, or will we imitate Paul as he followed Christ's example of unity and love?   [1] Margaret Mitchell, Paul and the Rhetoric of Reconciliation: An Exegetical Investigation of the Language and Composition of 1 Corinthians (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 1993), 1–2. [2] Mark Allan Powell, Introducing the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2009), 291. [3] All Scripture quotations are taken from the English Standard Version unless otherwise noted. [4] Witness Lee, The Fullness of God, chap.6, sec.4 (1985) in Living Stream Ministry, https://www.ministrybooks.org/books.cfm?n. [5] Witness Lee, The History and Revelation of the Lord's Recovery, in Living Stream Ministry, Chinese version page 129, https://www.ministrybooks.org. [6]Quoted from Chinese, http://www.pcchong.com/mydictionary/special/pneumatology3_5.htm.   [i]

Chapter 18: The Long Haul1. Lewis B. Smedes, Caring and Commitment (San Francisco: Harper &Row, 1989), 51.2. Ben Johnson, "Greyfriars Bobby," Historic UK, www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/Greyfriars-Bobby/.3. Chap Clark, Hurt 2.0: Inside the World of Today's Teenagers (GrandRapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2011), 66.4. Matthew 28:20, ESV.

Ummm...I can't believe I said KGV instead of KJV, but don't let that distract you from the message girl! Get your Bible and a highlighter. You're going to want to come back to these verses. Leather NLT Study Bible can be found on Amazon ESV Journaling Bible from The Daily Grace Co. Favorite Thing This Week: My Bible Collection The featured verses for this week are: Proverbs 17:24 Psalm 91 Psalm 46:1-3, 8-11 Psalm 34:4-7 Psalm 33:20-22 Psalm 27:1-3 Psalm 108:1 Worship on the way out: Tremble by Mosaic MSC Connect with us over on Instagram @EstherEndeavors or on the blog at EstherEndeavors.com Resources: Walter A. Elwell and Robert W. Yarbrough, Encountering the New Testament: A Historical and Theological Survey, Third Edition., Encountering Biblical Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 344. Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright 1996, 2004, 2007 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

You can find the Bible I use HERE Mine is a softcover, but other than that, they are the same. (If you decide to use this link to purchase, I will receive a small commission from Amazon at no additional cost to you. The commission helps to keep the Esther Endeavors Community going. Thank you!) Favorite Thing This Week: The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis The featured verses for this week are: Jude (all of it) Worship on the way out: Armies by KB Connect with us over on Instagram @EstherEndeavors or on the blog at EstherEndeavors.com Resources: Walter A. Elwell and Robert W. Yarbrough, Encountering the New Testament: A Historical and Theological Survey, Third Edition., Encountering Biblical Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2013), 344. Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture quotations are taken from the Holy Bible, New Living Translation, copyright 1996, 2004, 2007 by Tyndale House Foundation. Used by permission of Tyndale House Publishers Inc., Carol Stream, Illinois 60188. All rights reserved. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

The Path to Feasting with God Intro One of the most unexpected guests I ever had at my home is a man named Mr. Lopez. He came for dinner and staid on the couch for a few nights when Scott and I lived together. He barely spoke English and had little he could offer us apart from his company (which was a sweet blessing). The situation got complicated and got messier than I hoped it would. It didn't seem like there was much benefit that came out of it, as far as I know he's not walking with Jesus yet (although I did run into him once at the Spanish speaking church that met before us in the CityView building). The question I want to ask this morning is: was it worth it to open up my home to someone who had little to offer and created an emotionally hard and difficult situation? And if it was, why was it worth it? Our text will help answer that for us this morning. We will focus most of our time on verses 12-14 since in the other verses Jesus is reiterating some themes we have already talked about in other places in Luke. Heading 1 Revelation In our passage from last week, Jesus was attending a dinner that a leader of the Pharisees invited him to. He first addressed the guests and called out their glory-seeking behavior. Now, in our text this week, Jesus addresses the host. What word of challenge does Jesus have for the host? He utters the amazing words in this passage... Luke 14:12 ESV 12 He said also to the man who had invited him, “When you give a dinner or a banquet, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, lest they also invite you in return and you be repaid. Jesus divides up people into two different groups: those who can pay you back and those who can't.[1] In this verse, we see the first of the two groups: those who can pay you back. This could be friends, family, or business relationships that give you some kind of social or financial return. I just want to clarify quickly: Jesus does not mean you are not allowed to invite your friends or family over.[2] This would be a really unfortunate passage for our church if that were the case. Rather, Jesus is using exaggerated language to make a point. What's the point he's making? Jesus' followers should make feasting with the poor and those who can't pay you back a priority. Why can't feasting with friends and family be our only priority? Look at the reason Jesus gives us, “lest they also invite you and you be repaid.” What's Jesus's reason for not just feasting with those it's easy to feast with? The reward is too low. You are not getting enough out of it. You see, in the way God relates to us, when we do something natural like invite friends and family over, there is a natural reward of them inviting us over in return (there's nothing wrong with this. It's just that if this is all you do, you're aiming too low). On the other hand, when you do something supernatural like love someone who has nothing to offer in return, in those instance, God takes it upon himself to be the one to reward you. Solomon puts it this way in the book of Proverbs: Proverbs 19:17 ESV 17 Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed. What's this reward God wants to give us for feasting with the poor? Jesus will further clarify that for us in the next verse, Luke 14:13–14 ESV 13 But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, 14 and you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you. For you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” Now, Jesus clarifies the other group of people besides those who can pay you back: those who cannot pay you back. Jesus calls them the “poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind.” In their Jewish context, they would not only have lacked the resources to host you, but the social capital to make it worth it for you. Jesus mentions people with specific physical ailments that would have made excluded them from worship at the temple, so they would have been social outcasts.[3] So, having them over does not get you anywhere socially or financially. Who are these people in our culture whom we perceive as not being able to give in return (and I would argue wrongly): The materially poor who ask us for money on street corners. Our neighbors who may be socially awkward or disconnected. This could include single moms or people who just struggle to make friends. It could also include people with worldviews so progressive and different from our own that it would be sacrifice to have them in your home. Our fellow church members who are not socially or spiritually thriving. Now, Jesus says that if you invite such people over, you will be “blessed.” The Greek word we translate “blessed” here means “happy.” You will increase your levels of happiness (your levels of joy) by having the poor over to your home. How does this work since this group of people Jesus commended we have over often take from us more than they can give?[4] How can that possibly make us more hopeful or more joyful? Jesus gives us the reason in this verse, “because they cannot repay you.” As we said before, when you serve people who can't repay you, God himself takes it upon himself to repay you. Indeed, this verse goes on to say the very same thing, “for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the just.” The passive voice in the verb is a way the Bible specifies that God will be the one who rewards.[5] God will go above and beyond any sacrifice any of us have made to love the poor and reward us when Christ comes back and reigns as king. What will that reward be like? One theme throughout the Bible and one that we will soon see come up in this passage is that God's people are headed toward a feast with God in his new creation. One beautiful description of this coming feast is in Isaiah 25. Isaiah 25:6–8 ESV 6 On this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all peoples a feast of rich food, a feast of well-aged wine, of rich food full of marrow, of aged wine well refined. 7 And he will swallow up on this mountain the covering that is cast over all peoples, the veil that is spread over all nations. 8 He will swallow up death forever; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the Lord has spoken. The reward for feasting with the poor now is greater feasting with God forever. The more we sacrifice to welcome people who can't pay us back into our homes, the more God will delight to shower on us deeper levels of intimacy and feasting with him in the life to come. One statement I heart from one of my professors in seminary was: “what we believe about the future changes how we live today.”[6] This statement connects to our main point this morning: Our future feast with God changes who we feast with now. Before we keep moving on to the other verses in our passage, I want to ask, How would this reality affect our community? I want to mention three ways: Our homes would become pictures of what heaven will be like one day. In the new creation, we won't have anything to offer to God, yet he will gladly feast with us. Hosting the poor in your home makes heaven more tangible right now. The presence of the poor with us will help remind us that we are the spiritually poor before God. If we look in our passage, we see the words “poor” and “blessed.” Does anyone remember where they come from? The beattitudes earlier in Luke where Jesus talks about what a Christian is. A Christian is someone who considers themselves poor before God. The presence of the poor in our lives and homes should help us develop a deeper awareness of our own need for God's grace. Church, who is the poor before God, who is it whom God completely forgave all of our sin? It is us, is it not? The Apostle Paul describes our spiritual neediness in 2 Corinthians 9. He says, 2 Corinthians 8:9 ESV 9 For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sake he became poor, so that you by his poverty might become rich. Martin Luther, the german reformer also put this so well. Here is something he said at the end of his life on his deathbed, “We are beggars. This is true.” Feasting with the poor will break down the barriers between the rich and the poor that can often keep the poor from Jesus. The poor often don't first and foremost need stuff, they need relationship. Yet, the dynamic of a soup kitchen creates the sense that there is a superior person (the server) and inferior person (the person receiving). Yet, when we host the poor in our homes with an heart attitude of wanting to spend time with them as those who along with us are poor before God, the barrier between rich and poor starts to disappear and real relationship can begin. I first heard this idea from Tim Cain in a sermon he preached in 2015. Here is what he has to say, This passage is about far more than food—it's really about relationship. This passage is about treating the poor and the crippled and the lame and the blind with the same sense of love and honor and respect and appreciation that we have for our friends and relatives and rich neighbors. One woman who found herself stuck in poverty told the man who interviewed her, “I know people do a lot for me. But what I want is for someone to be my friend.” What this woman longed for was a friend. She wanted to sit at a table and eat with someone instead of standing in line to receive food from someone. That is what Jesus is calling us to in these verses. He is calling us to open our eyes and invite people who may not be anything like us into a relationship. We will be able to accomplish with our dinner tables and homes what millions of dollars service projects cannot. Getting back to the feast, one of the guests makes this same connection we did earlier between Jesus's command to feast with the poor and the future feast with God. Verse 15 says, Luke 14:15 ESV 15 When one of those who reclined at table with him heard these things, he said to him, “Blessed is everyone who will eat bread in the kingdom of God!” He hears Jesus's teaching about feasting with the poor. He comes to a correct conclusion: “those who feast with God forever will be happy.” However, there's something Jesus dislikes about his understanding that he wants to correct. We can see that verse 16 starts with the word, “but,” then Jesus tells a parable against the Pharisees that he is dining with. It seems as if one faulty assumption this Pharisee was making was that all or most of the Pharisees would be at this future feast with God. So, Jesus tells the following parable. Again he uses the familiar image of feasting to teach truths about the spiritual world,[7] Luke 14:16–17 ESV 16 But he said to him, “A man once gave a great banquet and invited many. 17 And at the time for the banquet he sent his servant to say to those who had been invited, ‘Come, for everything is now ready.' In Jesus's parable, a man, who represents God, invites many to a “great banquet,” which represents life with God forever.[8] The feast has been prepared, meaning that God is immediately available. “The many” represents the Jewish people and their religious leaders. We know that because one theme in Luke is God's invites his people and many refuse, especially the rulers. Next, Jesus says, Luke 14:18–20 ESV 18 But they all alike began to make excuses. The first said to him, ‘I have bought a field, and I must go out and see it. Please have me excused.' 19 And another said, ‘I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to examine them. Please have me excused.' 20 And another said, ‘I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come.' They don't come to this feast, because they have other priorities. These priorities are not bad things in and of themselves, but become bad things when they replace the best things. What are these other priorities: (1) “I have bought a field” could represent life priorities such as where you live and what you own. (2) “I have bought five yoke of oxen” could represent business priorities such as career advancement or starting a new business. (3) “I have married a wife” clearly represents romantic priorities, as in whom your pursing and whom your with. As I said before, none of these are bad things. They only become bad things when they choke out the best things. This is a word of caution from Jesus to the Pharisees that we would do well to take to heart: don't go around feasting with the poor, hoping it will do something good for them and for you spiritually, if you are not already feasting with God. The whole point of feasting with the poor is so that you and them can all have deeper intimacy with God. The imagery of feasting makes this point well: fellowship over food brings people into deeper relationship with each other. Yet, if you allow another priority to crowd out intimacy with God, feasting on his word and enjoying him, you won't find your efforts to feast with the poor or do anything else ultimately fruitful. Do you happen to have another priority right now that is choking out the highest priority we should already have of being with Jesus? We are waiting for a future feast with God, yet we are already invited to indulge in knowing and receiving him. Ps 34 says, Psalm 34:8 ESV 8 Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good! Blessed is the man who takes refuge in him! The answer is not to completely cut out other priorities in our lives, but contain them to reasonable boundaries so that we can be with our Father. What happens next? Luke 14:21 ESV 21 So the servant came and reported these things to his master. Then the master of the house became angry and said to his servant, ‘Go out quickly to the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in the poor and crippled and blind and lame.' It is insulting to the master that so many reject his invitation.[9] It even makes him angry. This points to the deep displeasure God had in the Pharisee's and many Jewish people's rejection of him. Jesus is saying to this guy at the feast, “you think it's going to be such a good time feasting together, but you and many of your friends won't even be there because you've rejected me: you have other priorities than being in a relationship with the God who made you. You need to repent of that if you are going to be one those who are blessed in this feast to come.” While many of us shrink back from loving others when others wound us, such is not the case with God. Instead, the master tells the servant to go invite more people. Who does God invite? None other than the poor and crippled to the feast. These “poor and crippled and lame and blind” are the uneducated, common people who make up many of Jesus's disciples who come to him (and may even represent Gentiles, that is non-Jewish followers of Jesus).[10] When we invite the poor into our homes, we are mimicking our God. He invites those who have a sense of their own spiritual need into his kingdom. When we invite those who are poor according to this world, we are turning our homes into a visual representation of that truth. After inviting the poor into the feast, the passage says, Luke 14:22–23 ESV 22 And the servant said, ‘Sir, what you commanded has been done, and still there is room.' 23 And the master said to the servant, ‘Go out to the highways and hedges and compel people to come in, that my house may be filled. So, the servant has went and invited some of the poor to come and there is still room. I think this detail in the parable represents a part of the character of our God: he has a huge heart and he desires to save and will save. I have a hesitancy that can keep me from pouring myself out to invite more people to know God or to come to my home. It's that from time to time, I can have a low view of God's purpose to rescue and to save. When I don't see him move in the lives of many unbelievers for a while, I can become discouraged and not want to persevere. Yet, I make a huge mistake if I base my evangelistic efforts on my own experience or my own past success. I am far safer to base my efforts on the character and heart of God to rescue sinners. The parable goes on to share what the right response to there being “room” left is, when you grasp that it is God's purpose to rescue all kings of people: “‘Go out to the highways and hedges and compel people to come in, that my house may be filled.” By compel, Jesus means to earnestly persuade.[11] We leave the comfort of our own homes and go out and compel people to know Jesus and come to our homes when we grasp how large God's heart is and his purpose to save sinners. When we have confidence that this is his heart, it starts to become our heart, and our lives start to show it. Does this verse describe your efforts to invite people to Jesus and into your home? If not, I submit to you that you have too low a view of God's heart to save and we need to grow in that. Luke 14:24 ESV 24 For I tell you, none of those men who were invited shall taste my banquet.' ” The most tragic thing in the world is when people refuse a dinner invitation from God. Yet, we should not let people's rejection of God give us a low view of our God's heart to save. Rather than approaching ministry with less zeal when we see other reject Jesus and us, we should approach it with greater zeal because God desires to save and rescue. One final word for us: if you are listening to my voice, don't be among those who refuse to go into the feast and eat with God. Don't be like those Pharisees who refused to acknowledge their spiritual poverty and come to Jesus. If you want to know how you can have your sins forgiven and feast with God forever, please talk to one of our members before leaving. [1] I got this insight from Tim Cain's sermon, Bethlehem Baptist Church. [2] John Calvin, Harmony of Matthew, Mark, Luke, trans. David W. Rev. William Pringle, vol. 1, Calvin's Commentaries 23 Volume Set (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 2009), 166. [3] Bock, D. L. (1996). Luke: 9:51–24:53 (Vol. 2, p. 1266). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. [4] I got this insight from Tim Cain's sermon, Bethlehem Baptist Church. [5] Bock, D. L. (1996). Luke: 9:51–24:53 (Vol. 2, p. 1267). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. [6] I heard this from Dr. Jason DeRouchie in his Old Testament course in 2014. He mentioned he got it from Scott Hafemann. [7] John MacArthur, Humbling the Exalted--Exalting the Humble (gty.org). [8] Bock, D. L. (1996). Luke: 9:51–24:53 (Vol. 2, p. 1273). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. [9] Green, J. B. (1997). The Gospel of Luke (p. 559). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. [10] John Calvin, Harmony of Matthew, Mark, Luke, trans. David W. Rev. William Pringle, vol. 1, Calvin's Commentaries 23 Volume Set (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 2009), 172. [11] Biblical Studies Press. (2005). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.

Intro Special thank you to everyone who helped!! How will we begin our time here? We will preach Christ from the word. Revelation Luke 13:22 ESV 22 He went on his way through towns and villages, teaching and journeying toward Jerusalem. Luke makes clear here what we have repeated several weeks: Jesus is on his way to Jerusalem. By this, Luke does not mean that the city itself is in focus as much as Jesus's purpose in going to that city. His impending purpose to die for sin is in view. All of these passages (including today's) aim steadily toward the cross and the cross will help us understand what Jesus is saying and doing. As he journeys, someone asks a question: Luke 13:23 ESV 23 And someone said to him, “Lord, will those who are saved be few?” And he said to them, Someone must have been listening carefully to Jesus's teaching along this journey. As I have mentioned, Jesus's teaching in these verses is very direct and convicting. As this man was listening, he came to a reasonable conclusion. Not all the Jewish nation would be saved. Many of God's people among whom he lived had not submitted their lives to the Scriptures and the Lord. So he asks, “will those who are saved be few?” As usual, Jesus has a rich answer that goes far beyond the question that the man asked. Let's take a look at that answer: Luke 13:24 ESV 24 “Strive to enter through the narrow door. For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. Jesus commands us to “strive” to enter the “narrow” door. People would use the word “strive” to describe the activity of an athlete competing for a prize: he's exerting tremendous effort.[1] “Narrow” denotes a constricted entry way which may itself require effort to get through. It would not be wide enough for a group to pass through, but only individuals.[2] What is this “narrow door” that we are to strive to enter? The narrow door is the challenging, direct teaching of Jesus that we have been hearing week after week now. Almost every text has been a call to repentance, to make a complete surrender to Jesus as king above all others. The narrowness of this one door points us to the reality that this is an exclusive path. There is no other way to approach God but through Jesus and the word of Jesus. As I mentioned, this exclusive path is responding rightly to Jesus's teaching. Jesus calls this the most essential thing earlier in this gospel.[3] Luke 10:39 ESV 39 And she had a sister called Mary, who sat at the Lord's feet and listened to his teaching. Later Jesus says, Luke 10:41–42 ESV 41 But the Lord answered her, “Martha, Martha, you are anxious and troubled about many things, 42 but one thing is necessary. Mary has chosen the good portion, which will not be taken away from her.” In the time of Christ, they had their Old Testaments (which Jesus referenced often), and the very Words of Jesus that constituted this path to life. Today, we have this book, the Bible, that consists of Jesus's Old Testament, his words while he walked on this Earth, and his Apostle's teaching on his Words. In other words, we can sum up the narrow path on which Jesus is calling us to walk in one question: How are you responding to this book? How you are responding to the words of God will tell you everything you need to know about how you are responding to God himself. How much you weigh and care about what another has said or written clearly reveals your heart toward that person (and an attitude of apathy or uncaring towards the words of others reveals a low esteem of that person). Does the word “strive” describe your life of knowing and living according to this book? Having a genuine, living faith in Christ produces a desperation for his Word and a desire to live according to all it says. Christian, we have to strive to be in this book daily and strive to obey what God is calling us to obey in it. Have you grown lax in spending time in this book or doing what you know it says? What Jesus say is, “strive to enter through the narrow door.” Now, I need to say a word about Christian striving. It's a unique kind of striving that differs from worldly striving. Wordly striving struggles to obtain something it does not have. Christian striving acts out what is already the case. One picture we get of someone in the gospel of Luke of someone who is striving to enter by the narrow way is Mary (she's doing the one necessary thing according to Jesus). And what is her posture? “She sat at the Lord's feet.” That's a strange way to strive isn't it? To be at rest? And yet, that's precisely when the person you are striving to relate to is Jesus. Jesus wants us to pursue him with intentional and real effort. It takes effort to spend time in the Bible and to put it into practice, and that's a good thing. However, our striving does not come from a heart that's anxious, unfulfilled, or uneasy. Why? Because the foundation of our relationship is not our striving to be with him. The foundation of our relationship with him is his life, death, and resurrection for us. That means before we ever start to strive, he accepts us. Before we ever start to struggle, he welcomes us. It's the welcome of Jesus, it's the free forgiveness from him that makes us want to know him more, that makes us want to strive to listen to his book and obey it. Truly receiving the welcome and forgiveness of Christ changes what we want the most and changes what we apply our effort to. The Christian life must be one of effort and striving, but it is never built on the foundation of trying to get into a relationship with God. It is always built on the finished work of Christ and that he has already received us into a relationship with him. This leads us to our main point this morning: Strive to listen to the one who's already accepted you. (Like a son striving to know a Father) And if you are here and you have not fully surrendered to Jesus and trusted him this morning, he is willing to accept you right now if you come to him. Please don't leave here without doing so. Jesus continues with his teaching, Luke 13:24–27 (ESV) 24 For many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. 25 When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door, and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us,' then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.' 26 Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.' 27 But he will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you come from. Depart from me, all you workers of evil!' Verse 24 has the word “for” in it, which in this case means, “because.” This is the reason we should strive so much to reach total surrender to the words of Jesus. Because many who seek to enter eternal life with God will not be able. Jesus tells us more in verse 25, “When once the master of the house has risen and shut the door,” There is a time where the door is shutting. The pathway that is open for salvation is only a temporary one. It will eventually close, either when your life ends or when Jesus returns. So, don't plan on striving tomorrow, strive today. “and you begin to stand outside and to knock at the door saying, ‘Lord, open to us,' then he will answer you, ‘I do not know where you come from.'” Those who did not strive in this life will desire to enjoy eternal life with Jesus. Yet they will not be able to obtain it. Jesus will say, “I do not know where you have come from.” Jesus has knowledge of all things, so this is not a lack of awareness. So, he must be speaking of intimate knowledge that happens in a relationship. They lacked an intimate relationship with Jesus. If you lack intimate relationship with Jesus in this life, you will lack intimate relationship with Jesus in the next life too. Only those who know him now will get to know him forever. This often for me can look like overwhelming anxiety. What can keep me from the Word and from surrendering to Jesus is, “Jesus, I have too many things to worry about.” Rather than rising in the morning to surrender fully to Jesus, I spend time worrying about my finances, my relationships, my church, my health, whatever. Yet, at the end of the day, this failure to strive will devastate me if I don't turn from it. Jesus uses the word, “strive” for a reason. It takes real conscious effort to put your bad habits, your idols, and your distractions to death to come and spend time with him, surrendering to every word he has said. Luke 13:26 ESV 26 Then you will begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.' This group that thought they were Christians, but were in fact not, bring up this objection: “We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.” Their claim is that they associated with Jesus and his followers. Their hope is that they have some form of innocence by association. I was around Jesus's followers and Jesus's teaching. Perhaps that describes you today. Your spiritual hope comes from church attendance and friendships with many Christians. It's easy to think this way. There were points in my life where I have. Thinking that my church attendance and association with God's people is what pleased God. Or perhaps, like these people, you could point to some good deeds you did or organization you were involved with. This things shows I'm a good person and must be right with God. However, it doesn't work like that, Luke 13:27 ESV 27 But he will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know where you come from. Depart from me, all you workers of evil!' Again, Jesus emphasizes, I am not looking for you to have familiarity with my followers, or a list of good deeds, but intimacy with me. He calls them “works of evil.” This is revealing. While there was an outward agreement with Christian principles, there was not a vigorous attempt to put sin to death and live in accordance with the word. The old lifestyle and habits lived on. One commentator made the point that the narrow door would only allow one person to enter at a time.[4] Friends, Jesus doesn't save groups of people at the same time, he saves individuals who surrender to him in trust. He puts those individuals into a family, yet they only enter one at a time. Have you entered yet, just yourself, into a posture of total surrender and listening to Jesus, or are you banking on your association with other Christians? Luke 13:28 ESV 28 In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God but you yourselves cast out. Jesus loves people, so he warns people about what is waiting for them if they won't turn to him. The “weeping and gnashing of teeth” describe the misery of those who die apart from Jesus. There could be nothing worse than spending all of eternity under the judgement of God. And what adds to it is the awareness that they have of missing out on the kingdom of God. Luke says they can see “Abraham and Issac and Jacob.” I want to pause here and clarify: Christian, you have the most important job in the world. Why? Because it's your job to keep this from happening to as many people as possible. That's what we are still on this earth for. This is another reason we have to strive to enter the narrow gate, because if we don't, we won't be able to call other people to do the same. Friends, we cannot give away what we don't possess. Just think about it, if someone was drowning and you jumped in to help them but didn't know how to swim, how would that go? When we strive to enter, we do not only do so for the sake of our own souls, but for the sake of others as well, Then Jesus says, Luke 13:29 ESV 29 And people will come from east and west, and from north and south, and recline at table in the kingdom of God. He's a twist in Jesus's teaching. His primary audience is the Jewish people here. Many of them wrongly thought that their ethnic heritage and religious lifestyle put them in a right relationship with God (innocence by association). However, Jesus just got done teaching that each of them individually must enter by the narrow door, no one, Jew or Gentile, would be saved if they cameto Jesus without striving. No one is born a Christian; all must become Christians. Therefore, many Jews who thought they were in a right relationship with God would be lost. On the other hand, an unexpected group of people would find life instead. The nations who surround Israel, who come from “East and West, and North and South,” who come from pagan cultures, would recline at table in the kingdom of God. Jesus makes this offer to strive to everyone and anyone who hears the gospel. There is no prerequisite to become his child other than complete surrender and trust. As a result, the make-up of heaven would shock an ancient Israelite, who would suspect that mostly Jews would be in the kingdom of God. Still today, God loves to save those far from him and those we don't expect him to. Christian when you reach heaven, you will be surprised at which people you will find there. What's the point? Never give up on anyone and never withhold the gospel from anyone because you don't think they will respond. Jesus loves to upset human expectations. He says as much in the next verse, Luke 13:30 ESV 30 And behold, some are last who will be first, and some are first who will be last.” The man comes up to Jesus and asks him, “will those who are saved be few.” Jesus's answer to that question does not seem to be “yes” or “no.” Instead, his answer seems to be, “are you saved”?[5] Jesus isn't worried if you come from a religious background, if you've lived a pretty good life or not, but whether or not you've surrendered to Jesus in trust today. Luke 13:31 ESV 31 At that very hour some Pharisees came and said to him, “Get away from here, for Herod wants to kill you.” Verse 31 starts with “at that very same hour.” The Pharisees, Jewish religious leaders, don't like this message very much. That's not hard to understand why. Jesus just got done saying that many Jews would be lost while those from all kinds of nations would come to life. So, they try to intimidate Jesus and drive him away from his ministry with fear.[6] They say, “Herod wants to kill you.” Which, he probably did. But Jesus refused to bow to intimidation. He has a powerful response: Luke 13:32 ESV 32 And he said to them, “Go and tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I finish my course. Jesus responds by calling Herod a “fox.” It's an apt description. Herod is a cunning killer, much like a fox. He's already responsible for the death of John the Baptist in this gospel. Yet, Jesus does not fear his ability to kill him. Jesus says in effect, I have a short time allotted to me to fulfill my ministry and then I will die and rise again. Until I fulfill my purpose, you can't harm me. Similarly church, no one else can kill you or severely hurt you until you finish your purpose from God. If your still breathing, it's because he still has work for you to do and will protect you until it's done. You could die for being a Christian, but not before God says its time. Then Jesus says, Luke 13:33 ESV 33 Nevertheless, I must go on my way today and tomorrow and the day following, for it cannot be that a prophet should perish away from Jerusalem.' Jesus then focuses his death, which will happen, not because it's Herod's plan but because it's God's plan. He mentions that his death place will be in Jerusalem, in line with the long line of prophets that had come from God and the Jewish people have killed. Again, he points out that the Jewish people have a history of rejecting God and his message, not of being in a right relationship with him. Again, he makes clear, it's not those who have a religious past or religious lineage, but those who have truly surrendered who are his own. Then Jesus says, Luke 13:34 ESV 34 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! Jesus now expresses his heart to us in relationship to the lost. He says the name of Jerusalem twice as an expression of deep sadness over the city.[7] Then, he describes his desire to protect and nurture them with the beautiful image of a hen spreading her wings over her children. What was the problem? The Jewish people were not willing. Their hearts stubbornly refused to come to the place of surrender to Jesus. Even right now, Jesus's will is not against anyone here or anyone in this neighborhood: it's us who set our wills against him when we refuse his offer to come to him and live. These verses that reveal the heart of Christ should characterize our own hearts for this neighborhood as we begin church life here. Powderhorn MC got to walk around the neighborhood on Wednesday evening. We met several lovely people; I was blown away by how welcoming they were. And yet, as in the case in much of America today, it's likely that most of them still need to come to Jesus. The godly response to their condition is not indifference, or a sense of superiority, but sorrow. Has God cultivated in your heart yet a sorrow for the lost? I want to encourage us to have a heart for these people who live around this particular building as folks God has placed near our place of worship. That gives us an extra responsibility for their souls. At the very least, I encourage us not to rush in and out of this building on Sundays, but to take our time and to be willing to greet, converse with, and minister to those from the neighborhood we meet. Part of the reason I'm striving to enter the narrow way, fighting to be close to Jesus, is so that when I interact with them, they are experiencing what Jesus is like. As we move into this neighborhood and begin to worship here, should we be joyful or sorrowful? The answer is “yes.” Our hope that we know Jesus and will forever should create a wellspring of hope and joy in our hearts. The fact that so many others don't yet should lead to sorrow for them. And the combination should be a bitter-sweetness about us where we are both filled with joy and sorrow all together. I imagine that's what Jesus was like and our emotional life should reflect as well. Luke 13:35 ESV 35 Behold, your house is forsaken. And I tell you, you will not see me until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!' ” “Your house is forsaken.” Jesus describes the true emptiness of a city or a person who lives apart from him, no matter how happy or prosperous they might seem. “I tell you, you will not see me until you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” No person or city will get Jesus unless they want Jesus. That's true for Jerusalem and that's true for Corcoron. Church the only way we can help others want Jesus is to enjoy him so much that they want him also. [1] Vincent, M. R. (1887). Word studies in the New Testament (Vol. 1, p. 376). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. [2] Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 942). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [3] I believe this thought was inspired by a thought in this commentary: Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., & Brown, D. (1997). Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (Vol. 2, p. 113). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc. [4] Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 942). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [5] Bock, D. L. (1996). Luke: 9:51–24:53 (Vol. 2, p. 1241). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. [6] John Calvin, John Calvin: Commentary on Matthew, Mark, Luke - Volume 2 - Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). [7] Biblical Studies Press. (2005). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.

Ross Tenneson preaches from Luke 13:1-9. You Have to Die If You Want to Live Connection/Tension We are still in the heart of Jesus's teaching and ministry as he ventures toward Jerusalem. This text serves as a climax to the teaching Jesus has been giving the last few weeks, warning people to prepare for his second coming and judgement.[1] These texts right here in the middle of Luke have been pretty weighty haven't they? Jesus teaches with such weight and gravity because the stakes are so high for each one of us. Our response to God in this life will reverberate for eternity. So, Jesus is direct and clear because the situation calls for it. Jesus talks about repentance in this story which is something as Christians we are all eager to do. Yet, it's easier said than done. Repentance is something we all want to do, but struggle to follow through with. I had an addition to inappropriate content on the internet, and it took me almost a decade to repent from that. One question I want to ask this evening is: how can we repent when it's hard? (When it feels like our sin has a fish hook in our mouths). Jesus is going to call us to repentance in this passage and teach us more about what it is in a parable he teaches. Along the way, he will give us power to do what we all want to do more of but struggle. Let's jump into our passage, Heading 1 Revelation Luke 13:1 ESV 1 There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. Jesus is in the midst of speaking with crowds of people about his return, the final judgement, and the need every person has to get right with him. As people so often do, they bring up an unrelated topic from what Jesus was talking about. Apparently, it was what was on their minds, so they share it with Jesus. What did they share with Jesus? A tragedy had happened in Jerusalem recently. Some Galileans, people from Jesus's hometown, had made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem to offer sacrifices.[2] This would have been a great moment in their lives as they got to see the temple and approach God's dwelling place on Earth. Perhaps they had been anticipating this moment for many years. Instead of making their sacrifice, they die barbarically at the hands of Pontius Pilate, the Gentile governor over Jerusalem. He kills them and mixes their blood with the blood of their sacrifice, a desecration of God's altar. Their persecution and the desecration of the altar recalls the treatment of the Jews in Daniel and his prophecies about how the nations would mistreat God's people. It makes sense that this atrocity would be on people's minds. Perhaps it's somewhat similar to the way the calamity in Afghanistan had been on some of our minds this week. They come to Jesus and they want to get his take on it. We won't know whether they are horrified and trying to grasp what had happened or trying to get Jesus to comment on a contemporary political event out of curiosity. Yet, how he does respond must have been very surprising: Luke 13:2 ESV 2 And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? Instead of giving them the answer they were expecting, he addresses a misunderstanding on their part. He poses this question to confront their wrong thinking. That's a weighty question. In other words, “do you think the reason those people died and others still live is because they were worse sinners than others.” Such an opinion reflected the common understandings of the day.[3] People tended to attribute suffering and misfortune to people getting what they deserve from God. Job's friends and the way they assumed he had especially sinned because he especially suffered reflect this attitude. Thankfully, not many of us think as explicitly in this manner any more. Few of us would assume that the suffering in Afghanistan or elsewhere is because of specific sins that those people committed. However, I don't think we should be so certain that this attitude doesn't linger on in us. While we would be slow to think such a thought about others, I believe it's our instinct to think in this manner about ourselves. In other words, when my life is going well and my circumstances are good, my God loves me and is nearer to me. On the other hand, when my life is falling apart and my circumstances are poor, God must not love me and is far from me. The error is trying to draw a line of interpretation between a particular event of suffering and God's heart toward a particular person (or yourself). Here is Jesus's warning against that. The way he asks his question sets us up for the rebuke he is about to give. I believe human thinking gravitates in this direction because we like to think we control our own fate. We like to think that by our goodness or wickedness we can get God to respond to us in a certain way. Hence, when things go well for us, we tend to conclude God is for us. When they go poorly, we tend to conclude God is not for us. And every time we think in this manner, we are in error. We must not think we can determine the hidden wisdom of God, or the ultimate plan of God, or the true heart of God from individual events in our lives. We simply don't have the perspective or the wisdom he has. We won't understand all of the facets of God's mysterious plan while we are in this life. Next, Jesus provides the answer to his question, providing a true and better interpretation of these events: Luke 13:3 ESV 3 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish. With emphasis, Jesus answers his question: “no!” He interprets this event far differently than commenting on the individual lives of those who perished. Instead, he says, “But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” In other words, the fate of those who died was not informing us about their own sinfulness. It was a reminder to usof all of our sinfulness. The biblical view since that fall of Adam is not that humanity is in two categories: good and bad . Rather, the teaching of the Bible is that since the fall of Adam, all of humanity is in one category: sinners in need of a savior. Jesus then gives another example to further clarify his point: Luke 13:4 ESV 4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them: do you think that they were worse offenders than all the others who lived in Jerusalem? The first example was intentional evil committed by a human against others. In Jesus's second example, he includes random accidents that also result in suffering and death. Such an event would seem even more to be an act of God since it happened without any intentional human actor. Certainly, here, the deaths of those who died in the collapsing tower, these ones deserved to die more than those who remained alive. Again, Jesus strongly denies this thinking, Luke 13:5 ESV 5 No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.” These judgments are not pointing out the particular sinfulness of those who perish in them. Rather, they are pointing to the final judgement where we all will perish unless we repent. Last year, Tom Schreiner (a prominent Bible professor) was commenting on the Coronavirus and what it teaches us about God. Here is what he had to say: “All temporal judgments are meant to direct our attention to final judgement.” The mini-judgments that we see in the world today are not random events. They are warning alarms, they are storm sirens meant to wake us up to the reality of divine judgement. We tend to question the goodness of God when we see these events (“how could a good God let that happen?”). However, we should be marveling at God's goodness that the vast majority of humanity, who deserve judgement today, are instead receiving time to repent. And the judgments that happen around us are not the random acts of an uncaring God, but his strongest urging to his creation to turn from their sin and live. The fact that God caused the sun to rise today on so many people who don't care about him or love him and that He has given them a fresh opportunity to repent is a wonderful miracle. What is one way repent when you are struggling? Remember that final judgement is coming and only repentance delivers us from it. I want to drill deeper into this word “repentance.” That's one of the most important words you will ever hear. With it, you will live forever with God. Without it, you will die apart from him. If there's anything I want to do in my life, it's this: to repent. What does it mean to “repent”? To repent is “to turn” from your old way of living. From pursuing your idols and your sin to pursuing God. It's a renewal at the level of your heart in which you completely surrender to God and give him all of your allegiance. When you repent, you dethrone whatever was your God, and God instead sits on the throne of your heart. Repentance is radical change within from being against God to being for God. There's nothing sweeter, nothing harder, and nothing better than repenting. You might be wondering where “faith” appears in this passage since the Bible so clearly teaches that faith alone is necessary to be right with God. Very simply: true faith and true repentance are inseparable. That's because repentance requires trust. To repent before God is to come before him completely vulnerable and completely surrendered. You could never bow down and offer yourself to someone you thought would harm you rather than receive you. You would only keep running and fleeing from him (or fighting against him). However, when you believe he's good and he alone can help and rescue you, then you come to him in allegiance and surrender. This is why the gospel is necessary for repentance. Friends, Jesus lived and died in our place so that God would freely and joyfully forgive and welcome us. If Jesus did not die on the cross, then we couldn't trust God to forgive us, to welcome us, to restore us. The fact that we can repent, and that there is a good God who will receive our repentance, is owing to nothing less than the blood of Christ. Repentance, the turning away from our sin to God, is the only way we can escape death and live forever with God. All other alternatives, all other attempts at preserving your soul will fail. All human attempts at saving ourselves are futile. There's a movie series that used to be a big deal in the 80's starring Arnold Schwarzenegger as The Terminator. There's a famous line from the second movie. Arnold comes to rescue Sarah Connor as her deadly nemesis is closing in. Can anyone remember what that line is? “Come with me if you want to live.” Jesus is making as exclusive, as radical of an offer to any who will listen to his voice today, “Come with me if you want to live.” Every other and all other remedies will fail. I have two questions to ask you before we move onto the next portion of this passage: (1) If you are not yet a follower of Jesus, will you repent? Will you do the most radical thing of your life and completely surrender to Jesus? (2) If you are already a follower of Jesus, have you repented yet today? Repentance is what keeps Christianity from being sterile religion and turns it intoa rich relationship with God. The deep level of vulnerability we are talking about here to a person you trust is the essence of what forms an intimate relationship. Is it any mystery that God seems further off when we give in to sin? It's not him who's withdrawing church, it's us. And the answer is to repent. Next, Jesus transitions into a parable that further illuminates what he means by repentance and what repentance means for us, Luke 13:6–7 ESV 6 And he told this parable: “A man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none. 7 And he said to the vinedresser, ‘Look, for three years now I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and I find none. Cut it down. Why should it use up the ground?' Why does Jesus start telling this parable about fruit right after he warns his audience to repent? The gospel of Luke connects repentance and the image of fruit together. Luke 3:8 (ESV) 8 Bear fruits in keeping with repentance. What does the image of fruit teach us about repentance? Fruit on a tree is the outward evidence of a tree with a healthy root. Healthy trees produce healthy fruit. If repentance is the renewing of the root, the changing of the inner person to trust Christ and flee from sin, then the fruit is the outward changes in behavior and lifestyle that go with real repentance. You cannot change your allegiance and not change your actions. Your ultimate allegiances determine your actions, so changing from surrendering to sin to surrendering to Christ will always produce new ways of life to replace old ones. And fruit equals life, right? Fruit comes from life and sustains life in others. Repentance replaces death with life. We can tend to focus almost exclusively on repentance as putting sin to death and think of it as something unpleasant. However, that's only part of repentance. It's also the transforming of behaviors that bring death into behaviors that bring life. Through repentance we become new creations who bring life to others rather than death. A few of us are reading through Rosaria Butterfield's book The Gospel Comes with a House Key. She did the best of anyone I know of of illustrating this point, “Paul knows how deep real repentance goes- how it undoes a sinner and remakes him, and how it leave him raw, vulnerable, and transparent. I imagine Paul— years after the Lord had made him an apostle, years after his days of slaughtering Christians for religious zeal— breaking bread with a fellow believer and recognizing something in the shape of an eye, the turning up of a nose, the tone of a laugh or cry. I also imagine the horror that could have seized him, stopped him, made him gasp for breath. I can feel the recognition: that eye, that nose, that voice, so similar to someone he had murdered. Paul may have found himself at table fellowship with the children of a faithful mother he had killed in his Pharisaical zeal. Repentance changes everything. Through it, you become something you could never imagine.” (p. 133-134). Repentance isn't just about stopping sin (though it is that), it's just as much about you transforming into a new person who brings life to those around you like God brings life to you. (Like a thief who follows Christ and enjoys giving things to others rather than taking them). Each time you repent, you are actually experiencing a death and resurrection. Your old allegiances, your old desires, and your old self-reliance is dying and what's coming to life in its place are new allegiances, new affections, and a new dependence on God. Repentance is threatening, scary, and hard because it requires us to kill the idols we were trusting in. But what it brings into being within us is utterly worth it. This brings us to our main point this evening: We have to die in order to live. Repentance is both a death and a resurrection. Our old self and our old agenda dies, and our new self and God's agenda replaces it. So few people repent because no one wants to die to themselves. Yet, we have to die in order to live. If more of God and more of Christ is at the other end of repenting, isn't it worth doing at every opportunity, Church? No matter how much it costs? A second second way to repent when it feels hard to repent, ask yourself if you want Jesus or your sin more? Don't repent just because it's something you have to do. Repent because there's something (or someone) on the other side you want more than your sin, namely Christ. So, I want to ask us: Where in your life do you need to repent? What needs to die so that fresh life can replace it? For me, one area of repentance I need to walk in is turning from time wasting. It's so easy for me to get lost on the internet or social media. It's so easy for me to find some show or game to fill my time. Those things are not wrong in moderation, but when they become habitual and mindless, they are bringing death to my relationship with God and keep me from bringing life to others. I have less time to pray, less time to evangelize, less time to serve. My margin disappears and so does the power that rests upon my life. One sin that I urge us to repent of today are time-wasteing habits that have an inordinate control over my time and life. Getting back to the parable, we have to weight Jesus's words. He is talking about cutting down the tree that fails to bear fruit. Once again, Jesus is warning these crowds about the disastrous consequences of failing to repent. The man commands the vinedresser to cut the tree down because it failed to bear fruit. These words require me to be blunt: is there sin in your life you are coddling and refusing to put to death? To be clear, if you are not committing a sin less and less as time goes on, but continuing to walk in it habitually, you are not repenting (your allegiance hasn't actually changed). Repentance is an inward change of allegiance that results in outward change (not merely feeling sorrowful or regretful). Since the consequences of not repenting are so high, I urge you: repent. Do not leave this room this evening without repenting. This could be the last chance you have. The only decision we will ever regret for all of eternity is not repenting. So, please, don't fail to do this all important thing. These verses in the parable highlight the severity of our Lord in punishing sin. The next verses in this parable will highlight his mercy in restraining his punishment for now, Luke 13:8–9 ESV 8 And he answered him, ‘Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and put on manure. 9 Then if it should bear fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down.' ” The point of this development in the parable is to illustrate the mercy of God, which is sweeter than anything we've ever heard of when it's placed against the backdrop of the justice and wrath of God. The mercy of God is the sweetest and only hope we have. Here we see the mercy of God expressed in the patience of God in withholding the judgement of God.[4] The vinedresser asks for another year to dig around the tree and put fertilizer around it. The patience of God is in withholding judgement that people deserve today so they have an opportunity to repent. Meanwhile, God supplies what's necessary to repent: the preaching of the word, and conviction of his Spirit, and displays of his kindness in everyday life to draw sinners to himself. If you are still dead in your sins and have not repented, the reason you woke up today and enjoyed life-sustaining food and pleasant weather is not because you have no need of repentance and things are right between you and God. It is because God is giving you yet another opportunity to repent and become his child so you don't have to experience the same judgement you and I both deserve. Please don't misinterpret God's kindness. We live in a world that mixes together blessing and curse, safety and disaster, and it is all serving as a giant invitation to come to the Lord and be right with him before it's too late. Notice that his patience has an expiration date. After that year passes, he commands the vinedresser to cut down that tree if it will not bear fruit. So, when you die, or when Jesus comes back, which could come at any moment, there will be no more opportunities to repent. Since this evening could be your last chance, don't hesitate any longer: come talk to me or to any of our members afterward. Jesus is eager to receive you. He's happy to save you. He died so that you could come to him and receive free forgiveness, so please don't think this is not something he wants to do. The only reason someone would have to spend eternity without God is not because God refused to open his hand toward us, but because we refuse to take it. So, repent. [1] Green, J. B. (1997). The Gospel of Luke (p. 513). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. [2] Green, J. B. (1997). The Gospel of Luke (p. 514). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. [3] Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Lk 13:2). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press. [4] Bock, D. L. (1996). Luke: 9:51–24:53 (Vol. 2, p. 1209). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

In this week's episode we are looking at Philippians, specifically, in terms of what it teaches us about Christ. We dive into the historical and cultural background of the Greco-Roman world, the colony of Philippi, and then consider the "Christological hymn" of Philippians 2:5-11. Time stamps: 5:00-14:14 - Background 14:15 - 39:29 - Phil. 2:5-11 Episode book Pick: Embracing Shared Ministry: Power and Status in the Early Church and Why It Matters Today: https://amzn.to/2RGKa1M What is the Gospel? youtu.be/_0EFXpQUSlo Want to support CITC? Become a patron: patreon.com/christisthecure Interested in learning the biblical languages in a rosetta stone like format? Check out biblingo.org! Don't forget to take advantage of the CITC discount, just use the discount code: CHRISTISTHECURE when signing up! Follow our new project on Instagram: historia_ecclesiastica Also check out some virtual ancient world tours here:www.ancient-world.co?affid=V624P4Y9 “All Creatures of Our God and King” Original words (v. 1-2) by St. Francis of Assisi, translated by William Henry Draper. Music, 16th Century German tune, adapted by Jonathan Baird and Ryan Baird. Add. words (v. 3-4) by Jonathan Baird and Ryan Baird. © 2013 Sovereign Grace Worship (ASCAP). Used by permission. www.SovereignGraceMusic.org “All I Have Is Christ” Words and Music by Jordan Kauflin. © 2008 Sovereign Grace Praise (BMI). All rights reserved. Used by permission. www.SovereignGraceMusic.org References/Further reading: Burge, Gary, and Gene Green. The New Testament in Antiquity. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020. Evans, Craig A., and Stanley E. Porter, eds. IVP-NT Background. Accordance electronic. Dictionary of New Testament Background. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2000. Fee, Gordon D. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. Accordance electronic. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Gaius. Institutes of Roman Law | Online Library of Liberty. Edited by Edward Poste and E.A. Whittuck. 4th ed., 1904. Accessed April 20, 2021. https://oll.libertyfund.org/title/gaius-institutes-of-roman-law#lf0533_head_036. Hawthorne, Gerald F., Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid, eds. IVP-Paul & Letters. Accordance electronic. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Grand Rapids: InterVarsity Press, 1993. Hellerman, Joseph. “Brothers and Friends in Philippi: Family Honor in the Roman World and in Paul’s Letter to the Philippians.” Biblical Theology Bulletin 39, no. 1 (2009): 15–25. ———. Embracing Shared Ministry. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 2013. ———. Philippians. Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament. Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2015. Hellerman, Joseph H. “Vindicating God’s Servants in Philippi and in Philippians: The Influence of Paul’s Ministry in Philippi upon the Composition of Philippians 2:6-11.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 20, no. 1 (2010): 85–102. Kruger, Michael, ed. A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New Testament. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016. Schreiner, Thomas. New Testament Theology: Magnifying God in Christ. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008. Silva, Moisés. Philippians. 2nd ed. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2005. ———. “Philippians.” edited by G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson. Accordance electronic. Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007. Wellum, Stephen. God the Son Incarnate. Foundations of Evangelical Theology. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016. Yap, Marlene Yu. “The Crucifixion of Jesus Christ: From Extreme Shame to Victorious Honor.” Asian Journal of Pentecostal Studies 21, no. 1 (February 2018): 33–47.

Picking up where we left off in last week's Gospel, Jesus continues his Last Supper discourse, this time turning his attention to love, the law, and friendship with God. Taking the lead of the evangelist himself we explore the idea of belovedness and how receptivity to Divine love is the foundation of the spiritual life. Bringing in the topic of the law as well as the thought of Thomas Aquinas we discover that the practice of abiding in God's love has very little to do with our own efforts and everything to do with God's.Diving deep into our Gospel we'll spend our episode looking closer at:- What, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, we must do in order to keep God's commandments [8:49]- The Greek etymology of the word "friend" and what it can tell us about being friends of God [18:48]- The two Old Testament figures that were said to be friends of God [31:20]- Greco-Roman and Jewish conceptions of friendship that likely inform our Gospel [41:52]- Jewish inheritance law and what it has to say about friendship and servitude [45:04]- Some priestly overtones subtly present in the latter part of Jesus' exhortation to the Twelve [51:35]BIBLIOGRAPHYBrown, Raymond E. The Gospel according to John (XIII-XXI): Introduction, Translation, and Notes. Vol. 29A. Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008.Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John: A Commentary, Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012.Martin, Francis, and William M. Wright IV. The Gospel of John. Edited by Peter S. Williamson and Mary Healy. Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015.REFERENCESExodus 33:11 - "Thus the LORD used to speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend."Isaiah 41:8 - "But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, the offspring of Abraham, my friend"2 Chronicles 20:7 - "Was it not you, our God, who dispossessed the inhabitants of this land before your people Israel and gave it forever to the descendants of Abraham, your friend?"John 1:18 - "No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known."Numbers 8:10-11 - "When you present the Levites before the LORD, the people of Israel shall lay their hands upon the Levites, 11 and Aaron shall offer the Levites before the LORD as a wave offering from the people of Israel, that it may be theirs to do the service of the LORD."Numbers 27:18-19 - "And the LORD said to Moses, 'Take Joshua the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay your hand upon him; 19 cause him to stand before Eleazar the priest and all the congregation, and you shall commission him in their sight.'"

We continue exploring the Gospel of John in our readings for this Sunday. In them Jesus makes his seventh and final "I am" statement, comparing himself to the true vine. Combing through the Old Testament we discover that vine imagery is often associated with Israel, but an Israel that is unfaithful and disobedient. It is Christ then, the faithful son, and we his disciples who are to embody a new Israel, radically faithful to the Father. How do we achieve this faithfulness? Our Gospel reveals the secret.Diving deep into our Gospel we'll spend our episode looking closer at:- The seven "I am" statements in John, the last of which forms our Gospel- The image of the vine in the Old Testament and how it helps us interpret Our Lord's analogy- How our Gospel both demands and promises radical faithfulness- The ancient heresy that our Gospel was employed to refute- What it means to abide in Christ and a tangible way to practice that abidingBIBLIOGRAPHYBrown, Raymond E. The Gospel according to John (XIII-XXI): Introduction, Translation, and Notes. Vol. 29A. Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008.Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John: A Commentary, Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012.Martin, Francis, and William M. Wright IV. The Gospel of John. Edited by Peter S. Williamson and Mary Healy. Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015.REFERENCESPsalm 80:8-18 - "You brought a vine out of Egypt; you drove out the nations and planted it. 9 You cleared the ground for it; it took deep root and filled the land. 10 The mountains were covered with its shade, the mighty cedars with its branches; 11 it sent out its branches to the sea, and its shoots to the River. 12 Why then have you broken down its walls, so that all who pass along the way pluck its fruit? [...]Ezekiel 19:10-14 - "Your mother was like a vine in a vineyard transplanted by the water, fruitful and full of branches by reason of abundant water. 11 Its strongest stem became a ruler’s scepter; it towered aloft among the thick boughs; it was seen in its height with the mass of its branches. 12 But the vine was plucked up in fury, cast down to the ground [...]"Isaiah 5:1-7 - "Let me sing for my beloved a love song concerning his vineyard: My beloved had a vineyard on a very fertile hill. 2 He digged it and cleared it of stones, and planted it with choice vines; he built a watchtower in the midst of it, and hewed out a wine vat in it; and he looked for it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes [...]"Mark 12:1-9 - (Parable of the Vineyard)Matthew 21:43 - "Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it."John 13:10 - "Jesus said to him, 'He who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet, but he is clean all over; and you are clean, but not every one of you.'""All that the LORD has spoken we will do.” Cf. Exodus 19:8; Exodus 24:3, 7;)Luke 1:38 - “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.”Mark 14:36 - "Abba, Father, all things are possible to thee; remove this cup from me; yet not what I will, but what thou wilt.”Matthew 6:10 - "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, On earth as it is in heaven."John 5:19 - "“Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever he does, that the Son does likewise."John 8:28 - "So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority but speak thus as the Father taught me."John 1:3 - "All things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made."“Short of a miracle, a man who does not practice mental prayer will end up in mortal sin.” - St. Alphonsus“A man without mental prayer is not good for anything; he cannot even renounce the slightest thing.” - St. Vincent de Paul“If you do not practice mental prayer, you don’t need any devil to throw you into hell, you throw yourself in there of your own accord. On the contrary, give me the greatest of all sinners; if he practices mental prayer, be it only for fifteen minutes every day, he will be converted. If he perseveres in it, his eternal salvation is assured.” 
- St. Teresa of Avila

Basking in Easter glory, the Church confirms for us the tenderness and compassion of God's heart with our Gospel reading from the Good Shepherd discourse. Having compared himself to the gate of the sheepfold in previous verses, Jesus continues the theme, likening himself not merely to the gate but to the shepherd himself. Whereas a hired hand flees at the sign of danger in an act of self-protection, Jesus vows as Good Shepherd to put himself in harms way, taking the very place of the sheep so that his Father's will may be fulfilled.Diving deep into our Gospel we'll spend our episode looking closer at:- The analogy of sheep and shepherd and how it fittingly describes the relationship between God and man [10:22]- A more precise translation of the title "Good Shepherd" [16:50]- The true identity of the wolf according to ancient Christian tradition [21:56]- The allusions to Trinitarian theology contained in our Gospel and the manner in which they point to our Christian vocation and destiny [32:19]- The Jewish liturgical feast that contextualizes our reading and that points to a cleansing of the corrupt Jerusalem priesthood [44:58]BIBLIOGRAPHYBrown, Raymond E. The Gospel according to John (I–XII): Introduction, Translation, and Notes. Vol. 29. Anchor Yale Bible. New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008.Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John: A Commentary, Vol. 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2012.Martin, Francis, and William M. Wright IV. The Gospel of John. Edited by Peter S. Williamson and Mary Healy. Catholic Commentary on Sacred Scripture. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015.REFERENCESGenesis 31:38-40 - "These twenty years I have been with you; your ewes and your she-goats have not miscarried, and I have not eaten the rams of your flocks. 39 That which was torn by wild beasts I did not bring to you; I bore the loss of it myself; of my hand you required it, whether stolen by day or stolen by night. 40 Thus I was; by day the heat consumed me, and the cold by night, and my sleep fled from my eyes."1 Samuel 17:34-35 - "But David said to Saul, “Your servant used to keep sheep for his father; and when there came a lion, or a bear, and took a lamb from the flock, 35 I went after him and smote him and delivered it out of his mouth."Ezekiel 34:1-10 - "The word of the LORD came to me: 2 “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say to them, even to the shepherds, Thus says the Lord GOD: Ho, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep? 3 You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fatlings; but you do not feed the sheep. 4 The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the crippled you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them. 5 So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd; and they became food for all the wild beasts. 6 My sheep were scattered, they wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill; my sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none to search or seek for them. 7 “Therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD: 8 As I live, says the Lord GOD, because my sheep have become a prey, and my sheep have become food for all the wild beasts, since there was no shepherd; and because my shepherds have not searched for my sheep, but the shepherds have fed themselves, and have not fed my sheep; 9 therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD: 10 Thus says the Lord GOD, Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my sheep at their hand, and put a stop to their feeding the sheep; no longer shall the shepherds feed themselves. I will rescue my sheep from their mouths, that they may not be food for them."Jeremiah 23:1-5 - “Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” says the LORD. 2 Therefore thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who care for my people: “You have scattered my flock, and have driven them away, and you have not attended to them. Behold, I will attend to you for your evil doings, says the LORD. 3 Then I will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them, and I will bring them back to their fold, and they shall be fruitful and multiply. 4 I will set shepherds over them who will care for them, and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall any be missing, says the LORD. 5 “Behold, the days are coming, says the LORD, when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king."Zechariah 11:15-17 - "Then the LORD said to me, “Take once more the implements of a worthless shepherd. 16 For lo, I am raising up in the land a shepherd who does not care for the perishing, or seek the wandering, or heal the maimed, or nourish the sound, but devours the flesh of the fat ones, tearing off even their hoofs. 17 Woe to my worthless shepherd, who deserts the flock! May the sword smite his arm and his right eye! Let his arm be wholly withered, his right eye utterly blinded!”Micah 2:12 - "I will surely gather all of you, O Jacob, I will gather the remnant of Israel; I will set them together like sheep in a fold, like a flock in its pasture"Numbers 27:15-17 - Moses said to the LORD, 16 “Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint a man over the congregation, 17 who shall go out before them and come in before them, who shall lead them out and bring them in; that the congregation of the LORD may not be as sheep which have no shepherd.”Hebrews 13:20-21 - Now may the God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, 21 equip you with everything good that you may do his will.John 18:7-9 - Again he asked them, “Whom do you seek?” And they said, “Jesus of Nazareth.” 8 Jesus answered, “I told you that I am he; so, if you seek me, let these men go.” 9 This was to fulfil the word which he had spoken, “Of those whom thou gavest me I lost not one.”John 17:12 - While I was with them, I kept them in thy name, which thou hast given me; I have guarded them, and none of them is lost.John 1:29 - "Behold the Lamb of God"John 12:20-23 - Now among those who went up to worship at the feast were some Greeks. 21 So these came to Philip, who was from Beth-saida in Galilee, and said to him, “Sir, we wish to see Jesus.” 22 Philip went and told Andrew; Andrew went with Philip and they told Jesus. 23 And Jesus answered them, “The hour has come for the Son of man to be glorified."

This episode is anything but miserable!  Isaac Rehberg from the Anglican podcast Miserable Offenders joins us to discuss his top 5 favorite theologians (it is a good list), and Rev. Andrew shares a couple of his as well.Episode shownotes: Andrew refers to a couple of quotations from Karl Barth that can be found at: -Theology and Church: Shorter Writings 1920-1928. (NewYork/Evanston: Harper & Row Publishers, 1962) page 247-Keith Johnson, ed. The Essential Karl Barth: A Reader and Commentary. (Grand Rapids,MI: Baker Academic, 2019) page 116*the book on Augustine that Rev. Andrew mentions is St. Augustine of Hippo: The Christian Transformation of Political Philosophy by R.W. Dyson*the Revelation commentary I could not think of in the moment was Revelation: Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching by M. Eugene Boring*the man that Luther debated about communion in both kinds and who he refered to as a "vile smelling toilet" in his writing Babylonian Captivity of the Church  was Jerome EmserCheck out Isaac's podcast Miserable Offenders, which he co-hosts with Jesse Nigro and Andrew Brashier. It is a podcast on theology, culture, and the church while drawing from classical Anglican sources. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Episode 29- Original Sin (With a quick examination of Pelagianism, Semi-Pelagianism).   Bible References: Genesis 2:17, 3:6, 16-19. Romans 5:12-14, 8:7-8. 1 Corinthians 15:21-22. Ephesians 2:1-3.   Sources: Bavinck, Herman, John Bolt, and John Vriend. Reformed Dogmatics: Sin and Salvation in Christ. Vol. 3. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2006. Pg, 86,90-91, 93-94. Dagg, J. L. Manual of Theology, First Part: A Treatise on Christian Doctrine. Charleston, SC; Richmond, VA; Macon, GA; Selma, AL; New Orleans: Southern Baptist Publication Society; S. S. & Publication Board; B. B. & Colporteur Society; B. B. & Book Depository; B. B. Depository, 1859. Vos, Geerhardus. Reformed Dogmatics. Edited by Richard B. Gaffin. Translated by Annemie Godbehere, Roelof van Ijken, Daan van der Kraan, Harry Boonstra, Jonathan Pater, Allan Janssen, Richard B. Gaffin Jr., and Kim Batteau. Vol. 1–5. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012–2016. Ward, Mark, Jessica Parks, Brannon Ellis, and Todd Hains, eds. Lexham Survey of Theology. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2018.   Keep up with our Podcast via: Twitter: https://twitter.com/podcastcovenant Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/covenantpodcast/ iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/covenant-podcast/id1464738712 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3xaNyHKd85BZl3Cxw5CUk8?si=T89hvJfVQUCcvmVxvrfEfw YouTube, Podbean, Google Podcasts, Stitcher.