Sunday Morning Greek Blog

August 31, 2025

In Defense of “Thoughts and Prayers”: (Psalm 81:10–16; Jeremiah 2:9–13)

Filed under: 1 Corinthians,Courage,Creation,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Government,Hope,Jeremiah,LGBTQ,Luke Gospel of,Prayer,Psalms,Romans,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 3:48 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

I preached this message August 31, 2025, the Sunday after the school shooting in Minneapolis. This was a rough one to preach, as I tried not to get too political. But I’ve also had a long history of interacting with the LGBT community and promoting a compassionate response from Christians even in the face of sometimes harsh disagreements. The congregation received it well.

Jesus says this in Luke 12:8–10:

8 “I tell you, whoever publicly acknowledges me before others, the Son of Man will also acknowledge before the angels of God. 9 But whoever disowns me before others will be disowned before the angels of God. 10 And everyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven.[1]

The events of this week compel me to address a completely different subject than what is suggested by the texts we read in the bulletin today. But other passages from today’s Lectionary readings are completely on target for what I’m addressing today, so I will work those in as I go along.

With each school shooting or other mass casualty event perpetrated by those who seem to have lost their moral compass, the common-courtesy sentiment of “Our thoughts and prayers are with you” seems to come under increasing attack by those who rarely, if ever, have expressed any modicum of faith God. As a Christ-follower, I find this attitude incredibly difficult to understand. When a loved one dies, many of us will say something like, “I’m sorry for your loss” and perhaps follow that up with “My thoughts and prayers are with you.” How long before “I’m sorry for your loss” becomes a target of those who have no faith in God?

Now most of you, I think, can attest to the fact that I have been extremely cautious about addressing politics in my messages. For me to address something that might even come close to a political position, I would need to lay out a clear biblical principle for which I think we have some common ground as Christ-followers. Our salvation does NOT depend on our politics: who we voted for; what platform we support, and so forth. Our salvation depends completely on what Jesus accomplished on the cross and in his resurrection. Period. This morning is one of those mornings where the spiritual and faith issues outweigh whatever political concerns may be.

This issue of people who perceive themselves to have a certain amount of power and influence criticizing our “thoughts and prayers” is insulting to Christ-followers in more ways than one. That sentiment is NOT political, but spiritual, and it’s a spiritual act of warfare against those who may only have thoughts and prayers to offer. First, it calls into question the sincerity of those who express “thoughts and prayers.” It is an act of arrogant judgment against well-meaning people who are in fact more likely to pray and think about those affected than their self-absorbed critics are. Do they really expect that everyone has something more actionable to offer up? It’s almost as if they’re saying, “Just keep your mouth shut about God and let us handle it.

Second, those who have a critical attitude about “thoughts and prayers” have probably crossed over the line of the unforgiveable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit by denying the power of our thoughts and prayers. The cultural, societal, psychological, and political issues raised by tragic events are extremely complicated many times and as such can be overwhelming to the average person. “My thoughts and prayers are with you” is a simple statement that on the one hand represents “I understand the enormity of the situation,” but on the other hand is a desire to reach out to a power greater than themselves and perhaps try to gain some insight into actionable solutions, especially within their own faith communities.

Third, “thoughts and prayers” is an immediate, courteous response to a tragedy. It’s another way of saying “Let me know how I can help” or “Let me know what specific things I can pray about for you.” It’s an invitation to build community, especially in situations where the victims may have been vulnerable or marginalized. It is an offer to drill down deeper and address the root causes of the symptomatic manifestations of the problems and not just the symptoms themselves. It may be true that actions speak louder than words, but thoughtless actions or actions that fly in the face of God’s divine plan or a Judeo-Christian ethical framework may lead to even more disastrous results. I fear that we may be on the brink of the latter if we as Christ-followers do not act upon God’s prompting to give thoughtful consideration to both how we pray and what we pray for. In fact, this seems to be an age-old problem that the psalmists and the prophets wrestled with thousands of years ago.

Hear these words from the prophet Jeremiah 2:4–13 as he warns Judah of the coming exile:

4 Hear the word of the Lord, you descendants of Jacob, all you clans of Israel.

5 This is what the Lord says:

“What fault did your ancestors find in me, that they strayed so far from me?

They followed worthless idols and became worthless themselves.

6 They did not ask, ‘Where is the Lord, who brought us up out of Egypt and led us through the barren wilderness, through a land of deserts and ravines, a land of drought and utter darkness, a land where no one travels and no one lives?’

7 I brought you into a fertile land to eat its fruit and rich produce.

But you came and defiled my land and made my inheritance detestable.[2]

8 The priests did not ask, ‘Where is the Lord?’

Those who deal with the law did not know me; the leaders rebelled against me.

The prophets prophesied by Baal, following worthless idols.[3]

9 “Therefore I bring charges against you again,” declares the Lord. “And I will bring charges against your children’s children.

10 Cross over to the coasts of Cyprus and look, send to Kedar j and observe closely; see if there has ever been anything like this:

11 Has a nation ever changed its gods?

(Yet they are not gods at all.)

But my people have exchanged their glorious God for worthless idols.

12 Be appalled at this, you heavens, and shudder with great horror,” declares the Lord.

13 “My people have committed two sins:

They have forsaken me, the spring of living water, and have dug their own cisterns, broken cisterns that cannot hold water.[4]

When we look at a school shooting like what happened in Minneapolis this past week or at a Tennessee Christian school a couple years ago or even the one in Uvalde, Texas, we’re dealing with two primary causes in my mind. The first is a mental health issue. Setting the issue of gender dysphoria aside for the moment, which appears to have been a contributing factor in at least two of these instances based on the shooters’ manifestos, I think most of us agree that something went terribly wrong in the minds of those who think they needed to vent whatever anger or hatred they had on soft, easy targets like a grade school. Somewhere along the way, someone missed or intentionally overlooked important clues about a child’s or young person’s possible predisposition toward violence, if it was even there.

The fact that we’re human and NOT omniscient about everyone’s predispositions is, then, one of the primary reasons why we need “thoughts and prayers.” Our thoughts help us to examine a situation or situations we find ourselves in and make judgments about what is going on around us. “See something; say something” is the typical line we use. I would rather be guilty of misjudging a potential problem than ignoring it all together.

The second thing we’re dealing with is the problem of evil. My experience in interacting with people in the LGBT community goes back to the mid-1980s when my pastor asked me to speak with someone my age who was struggling with overcoming his attraction to men. We met a couple times and he even came to a couple of our college-group Bible studies. This was right before I left for seminary in 1987, so I lost touch with him and never found out where he landed.

When I got to seminary, I had a friend in the college who wanted me to talk to another young man about similar issues. If I remember correctly, he was a former student at the Bible college. But then I also had a college friend in the dorm at seminary who was raped by a male seminary student. He was kicked out of the seminary.

When I started as a campus minister in 1989 at Northern Illinois University, I discovered they had the largest “Gay-Lesbian Student Union” in the nation. Their rhetoric in the student paper was extremely hostile to Christianity and the church. But I was undaunted at the time and walked straight into the lion’s den and said I would like to have a productive, public dialogue with them and give them a more positive view of Christianity. I was invited to several forums to discuss the issues and concerns and had earned the respect of some of the panelists and leaders. I was able to present the conservative Christian view of homosexuality at a diversity conference back before DEI was a thing. I was even interviewed for a grad student’s documentary on gays in the military, and my commentary was included in the final production.

In the past ten years the issue has hit closer to home as I have several friends and extended family members who’ve had to navigate these kinds of issues. I am not without compassion when it comes to these issues, but I have strongly held beliefs based on nearly 40 years’ experience.

I say all this not to pat myself on the back, but to show that I’ve got some street cred when I speak about LGBTQ issues and that I’m not just spouting viewpoints from one particular perspective. I’ve done my homework., and I think that’s an important part of the “thoughts” when I say my thoughts and prayers are with the victims of the latest school shooting.

When I say this is a problem of “evil,” then, it is “evil” in the sense that I have developed a firm conviction that ANY sexual activity outside the bonds of heterosexual matrimony, regardless of the gender of those involved, is deemed to be a violation of God’s divine design for humanity. The author of Hebrews says in 13:4: “Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.”

For whatever reason, the apostle Paul in his treatise on “the obedience that comes from faith,” otherwise known as Romans, feels it’s important in the first chapter to address the issue of “unnatural” relations between women and the “shameful acts” between men (Romans 1:24–32). He makes no bones about having the proper relationship with the opposite sex and keeping that relationship pure.

One more thing before I move on. The word translated “homosexual” in 1 Corinthians 6:9 is translated as “fine clothes” in the gospels, and “soft” in reference to an animal’s coat or a grassy field on which horses train in ancient Greek literature. But when the word is applied to persons in ancient Greek literature, it always takes on a negative connotation. In the Iliad, it is used to describe a ship captain, Hector, who is dead because his body was “softened” with many spears. It also applies to a soldier who does not want to fight bravely. But in 1 Corinthians 6:11, Paul assures his readers that, because of their redemption, they no longer bear that shameful title.

I think it’s important as a church then, no matter how uncomfortable we may be, to address the issue of gender dysphoria. At a very high level, what happens is that a young person somehow develops a certain stereotype of what they think it means to be a boy or a girl, or a young man or a young woman and then decides their mindset somehow better aligns with the opposite sex or that they don’t like the stereotype for themselves.

Now I’m not trained in counseling people with gender dysphoria, so I can’t say for sure what happens to a young person at this point, but I think it’s safe to say that influences on them become more intense and come from a number of different angles and perspectives, some of which may not be honorable or based in a Christian compassionate care model. In other words, it can get really confusing for a young person who isn’t even sure if their initial self-analysis of the stereotype is based in reality. It’s easy to see why they feel anxious about what is going on in their lives. They and their families must be under an incredible amount of pressure given the potential backlash they may encounter.

Compassion must be the key here, and often it’s not. Gender dysphoria is, by definition, a psychological or mental health diagnosis. As such, then, the first method of treatment in many people’s minds should be some form of mental health counseling, and many States have already passed such laws to require that prior to any discussion of transitioning. Providing a physical, surgical “fix” to a person’s gender dysphoria issues is far from a perfect fix, and studies show that it creates a whole new set of mental health issues in many cases, and not a few have desired to be detransitioned. In some respects, it’s like soldering an electrical cord to the two ends of the battery contacts in a battery-operated radio. The radio is designed to run on the voltage of a couple batteries. It’s not designed to take 120 volts straight from the outlet! You need an adapter. But God did not design the human body to undergo such a transition. Great Britain, to their credit, has stopped transition surgeries on youth altogether because they have begun to recognize the solution was worse than the original problem.

I started out by saying I wanted to defend those who say “My thoughts and prayers are with you.” What I’ve given you hear is a sampling of the “thoughts” that I bring into the situation, and no one can accuse me of not having any intention of taking action on this subject consistent with Christian compassion and not in defiance of God’s creative order. This isn’t an empty sentiment with me, and I’m sure it’s not with you either. I’m guessing some of you have these experiences in your own families or among your friends and that you’ve already formed your opinions. I’m speaking from my own perspective here and I don’t expect everyone to agree with me. Jesus died for everyone, and that includes trans people or anyone else in the LGBT community. Regardless of where you fall on this issue, always show compassion and the love of Christ to those who need it most.

As for prayers, this is not an empty sentiment either, especially when we consider what the Bible tells us to pray for. Here’s just a sample: [NOTE: The congregation received a separate list of these verses as a help to guide them in their “thoughts and prayers.” I ran out of time when we got to this point, so I picked a few and said a brief prayer based on each one to close out the message.]

2 Chronicles 7:13–14:

13 “When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command locusts to devour the land or send a plague among my people, 14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.[5]

Nehemiah 6:9, as the Jews are being threatened for rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem:

9 They were all trying to frighten us, thinking, “Their hands will get too weak for the work, and it will not be completed.”

But I prayed, “Now strengthen my hands.” [6]

Acts 2:25–26, 30–31

25 You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:

“ ‘Why do the nations rage and the peoples plot in vain?

26 The kings of the earth rise up and the rulers band together against the Lord and against his anointed one.[7]

…

30 Stretch out your hand to heal and perform signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus.”

31 After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.[8]

Romans 12:9–21, esp. 17–18

17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.[9]

Ephesians 3:10–11

His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, 11 according to his eternal purpose that he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.[10]

Ephesians 6:12

12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.[11]

1 Timothy 2:1–2

I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people—2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.[12]

James 5:16b

The prayer of a righteous person is powerful and effective.[13]

Psalm 81:10–16

10 I am the Lord your God, who brought you up out of Egypt.

Open wide your mouth and I will fill it.

11 “But my people would not listen to me; Israel would not submit to me.

12 So I gave them over to their stubborn hearts to follow their own devices.

13 “If my people would only listen to me, if Israel would only follow my ways, 14 how quickly I would subdue their enemies and turn my hand against their foes!

15 Those who hate the Lord would cringe before him, and their punishment would last forever.

16 But you would be fed with the finest of wheat; with honey from the rock I would satisfy you.” [14]

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. (Quote from Psalm 2:1–2)

[8] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[9] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[10] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[11] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[12] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[13] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[14] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

December 7, 2024

Advent Hope

Filed under: 1 Corinthians,Advent,Adviento,Christology,Ephesians,Hebrews,Hope,Resurrection,Romans — Scott Stocking @ 6:08 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I presented this message at Mount View Presbyterian Church in Omaha, NE, on December 1, 2024, the first Sunday in Advent.

Looking for other Advent-themed messages?

What comes to mind when you hear the word “hope”?

If they’re motivated to stay off electronic devices for a while, a young girl might say, “I hope I get an American Girl doll for Christmas,” or a tweenage boy might say “I hope I get a remote-control race car.” The parents might say, “I hope we can pay off our credit cards after Christmas.” In the case of the kids, the “hope” that they might get what they asked for is at its core just a wish, but depending on their relationship with the potential gift givers (or promises made by those potential gift givers), their hope may have a firmer foundation than just a wish.

In the case of the parents, that “hope” becomes more of a pledge or commitment to do the hard work to pay off the cards and not so much winning the lottery, and “hoping” that no other major expenses arise that put a roadblock up against that goal.

For those who face more serious problems than what to get or how to pay for Christmas, their hope may take on a whole new dimension. This is very real in my own family situation right now. When the situation is bigger than you can handle on your own and you have little to no control how such help will come to you, “hope” begins to take on aspects of faith. This is similar to the kind of hope Paul ascribes to Abraham in Romans 4:18 when discussing the promise that Abraham would be the father of many nations even though he was old: “Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, ‘So shall your offspring be.’”

That hope sustained Abraham and the rest of his descendants not only in the long term, but it sustained him when God had asked him to sacrifice his son at Mount Moriah. He did not hesitate, because he knew, as we find out Hebrews 11 later, God could raise Isaac from the dead if that’s what it took to fulfill the promise.

Now you may find it interesting that the noun for “hope” (ἐλπίς elpis) never appears in the gospels. The verb (ἐλπίζω elpizō) only appears three times: once in an Old Testament quotation (Matthew 12:21) and twice in Luke (23:8; 24:21), once in reference to Herod’s hope that Jesus would perform a miracle in front of him, and the other in the disappointment of the disciples on the road to Emmaus about their hope that the recently crucified Jesus (who was walking with them at the time!) would redeem Israel. In fact the concept of “hope” does not really come to the fore until Paul is converted and begins his evangelistic mission to the Gentiles and writing his own letters to the young churches. Equally surprising is that neither the noun nor the verb is found in the book of Revelation, the book that documents our ultimate victory and fulfillment of our eternal hope.

One way to interpret this, I think, is that because the gospels record the life and events of Jesus the Messiah, the Old Testament hope of his coming was realized. They didn’t have to hope any more because he was there! But Jesus’s death and resurrection put new spin on what Jesus’s ministry on earth was really all about. It wasn’t about overthrowing Rome; it was about showing the Jews how God wants to relate to them. The Jews up to that point thought that his first coming was his only coming, and that would be the establishment of the eternal kingdom. But Jesus’s resurrection was not only for the Jews but for all mankind, and so the new hope, the hope of a resurrection into eternity, was what Christ-followers now had to communicate to the Gentiles AND the Jews. Everyone needed to know the message. The book of Revelation emphasizes the role of the Savior, the Lamb of God, in the last days, so again, that is the story of hope realized.

That is one reason why our NT passage today speaks about the end times. But since we just covered that from Mark’s gospel a couple weeks ago, we’ll simply use that as a jumping-off point to talk about the theme of this first Sunday of Advent: Hope.

Hebrews 11:1 says, “Faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.” In context, that was referring to Old Testament patriarchs’ trust in the promise that the Messiah would come. Paul says in 1 Corinthians 13:13 that there are three things that will never pass away: “faith, hope, and love.” The question is, then, what is the eternal nature of this “hope” Paul and the other NT writers speak of? I would suggest that there are three main aspects of this hope:

  1. A more immediate hope for Christ-followers that gives them encouragement and strength to face the day-to-day battles.
  2. A hope for the ministry of the church that the gospel message would spread around the world and especially to the Gentiles.
  3. The hope of our final salvation and transformation into our eternal home in heaven.

Let’s take a look at each of these.

We’ve already hinted at the more immediate hope for believers as Paul described Abraham’s hope and faith in Romans 4 above. We see in Romans 12:12 that Paul wants the believers to “be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer,” activities in the here and now. We also see this toward the end of Romans in 15:13 in a sort of “mini benediction”: “13 May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.”[1] Paul wants them to know the joy and peace of following Jesus in this life so that hope springs eternal in them.

We see in Ephesians 1:18 that Paul is praying they (and you) might know “the hope to which he has called you,” and he goes on to describe that hope in chapters 4 through 6 of that epistle: “just as you were called to one hope when you were called” (4:4b). In the verses immediately following that passage Paul describes the ways in which can live for Christ and live the Christian life to the fullest. Jesus equips us to minister in our own unique ways. He promises that when we do this, we will move on to maturity, learning what it means to put off the old self and to allow Christ to give us a new heart and a new attitude.

Paul even praises the Thessalonians for their exemplary faith and actions: “19 For what is our hope, our joy, or the crown in which we will glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes? Is it not you?”[2] The Thessalonians had willingly received and committed themselves to the word of God in spite of the suffering that ensued from their own people. Paul suggests that the Corinthians are in the same boat as the Thessalonians when he says, “7 And our hope for you is firm, because we know that just as you share in our sufferings, so also you share in our comfort.”[3]

On the second aspect, the ministry of the church, Paul recounts his own experience as he speaks of the hope he and the people of Israel had been waiting for: “This is the promise our twelve tribes are hoping to see fulfilled as they earnestly serve God day and night. King Agrippa, it is because of this hope that these Jews are accusing me.”[4] Paul would go on in that testimony to affirm that Jesus had called him to be a minister to the Gentiles so they would know the hope of the gospel. In Peter’s first letter, he says: “15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have.”[5] He’s giving instruction there to those who are facing persecution, so that those who hold firm to their faith and do this “with gentleness and respect” might win over their haters and bring them into the fold for Christ.

Paul speaks of this in 1 Corinthians 9:10b as well: “Whoever plows and threshes should be able to do so in the hope of sharing in the harvest.”[6] Paul is talking here about his work as an apostle in taking the gospel to the Corinthians so that they might know the eternal hope of the gospel. Let’s take a look at this third and final aspect of hope, the hope of eternity in our heavenly reward.

In Acts 23:6, we have what is likely the earliest reference of Paul introducing the word “hope” into our Christian vocabulary in the sense of eternal hope. This happens after his arrest for allegedly disrupting Temple protocol. He’s standing there in front of the Sanhedrin as well as Roman soldiers, and Paul distracts the proceedings by bringing up a subject that causes infighting among the members of the Sanhedrin: “6 Then Paul, knowing that some of them were Sadducees and the others Pharisees, called out in the Sanhedrin, ‘My brothers, I am a Pharisee, descended from Pharisees. I stand on trial because of the hope of the resurrection of the dead.’”[7] Paul indicates here that the reason for his hope is based on the truth of Jesus’s own resurrection from the dead. Paul had perhaps already written his first letter to the Corinthians at this point, in which he says this about the resurrection: “16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied. 20 But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep.”[8]

Paul understood that without the resurrection, there could be no hope of eternal life in heaven. Heaven is a real place, and our new, resurrected bodies will be “spiritual” in the sense that they will be incorruptible (1 Corinthians 15:42–44). This seems to suggest some unique makeup we can’t completely comprehend. Heaven has streets of gold, so we’ll be walking around. The tree of life will bear fruit each month (Revelation 22:2), so I’m guessing we’ll have something to eat.

Galatians 5:5 says, “5 For through the Spirit we eagerly await by faith the righteousness for which we hope.”[9] Paul emphasizes that in 1 Thessalonians 5:8–9: “But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.”[10] God “predestined” that those of us who believe would receive that eternal reward in heaven. Hold firmly to that promise until the end, as Colossians 1:22–23 says: “22 But now he has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy in his sight, without blemish and free from accusation—23 if you continue in your faith, established and firm, and do not move from the hope held out in the gospel.”[11]

Paul says in Romans 15:4 that the Old Testament also points us in this same direction, toward eternity with God in heaven: “4 For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through the endurance taught in the Scriptures and the encouragement they provide we might have hope.”[12]

Titus 2:11–14 has a powerful summary of the three aspects of hope I’ve presented to you today:

11 For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people. 12 It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, 13 while we wait for the blessed hope—the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.[13]

As we commence with the Advent season, let both remember and share the hope we have in Jesus, not only for our life in the here and now, but in our eternal life in the hereafter. May God bless you and your families and friends this Christmas season. Amen.

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. 1 Thessalonians 2:19. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. 2 Corinthians 1:7. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Acts 26:7 Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. 1 Peter 3:15. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[8] The New International Version. 2011. 1 Corinthians 15:16-20. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[9] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[10] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[11] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[12] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. (See also Titus 1:2).

[13] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

November 25, 2024

Don’t Worry; Be Faithful (Matthew 6:25–34; Acts 22:23–29)

Filed under: Acts,Ecclesiology,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Government,Matthew Gospel of,Prayer,Romans,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 8:50 pm
Tags: , , , , ,

America is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Even in the last four years with inflation being what it’s been, the COVID pandemic and our faltering response to it, and the culture wars that have divided our nation, there really is no other place to go where we could have the guarantees of freedom in our Constitution to give us hope to overcome bad times and look forward to even better times and to renewed prosperity.

America is really the best place to live, I think anyway, where we don’t have to spend much time “worrying about our lives, what we will eat or drink, or about our bodies and what to wear.” Even the poorest among us have access to safety nets to provide basic needs like health care, affordable shelter, and food. It is true, as Jesus said, that we will always have the poor among us. Some either by their own choice or by circumstances beyond their control, may find themselves in desperate need from time to time.

Our governments, both federal and local should be good stewards of the “resources” we “contribute” to address these situations and other affairs of City and State. Sometimes that works, and I think most of us can agree that sometimes the greedy get in the way and misappropriate these resources. When that happens, people rightly get angry and demand accountability. We have charities and churches working hard to mitigate and alleviate these situations, and they often do much better than the government.

Even with the presumed good intentions of the government and ministries of churches and charities alike, I do hope we realize that these earthly institutions are fallible because they comprise fallible, fallen humans in their ranks. But on this Sunday, Christ the King Sunday, the last Sunday of the liturgical year (can you believe Advent starts next week!), I hope we recognize that the only one in whom we can put our unfailing trust is God Almighty, the heavenly father, who has as much concern for “the least of these” as he does for all the rest.

When we look at God’s amazing creation, we see that the birds and the bees and the flowers and the trees all manage to survive from one year to the next and they don’t have near the intelligence that you and I have. We recognize the beauty of the works of God’s creation in nature; awe at the way the complex interactions of our ecosystems work in harmony most of the time; and marvel at the complexity of the design of each unique, tangible human body along with the capacities of its intangible mind and soul. And yet Jesus says that “Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these” and that we cannot “add a single hour to our lives” by worrying or counting how we might feed and clothe ourselves.

Jesus closes out this passage by saying, in so many words, take things one day at a time. Don’t worry about tomorrow, tomorrow will come soon enough. Jesus makes a promise that many of us have taken to heart: “Seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.” In other words, “Don’t Worry, Be Faithful.” Sorry, I haven’t written the words to that spoof song yet.

As I said above, we who live in America typically don’t have to worry about persecution coming from our government, although there have been some well-publicized exceptions to that targeting Catholics in the past few years. But in other countries around the world, many Christians do have to be concerned about such things.

My friend shared a newsletter from C2CMinistries, based in Hong Kong, that tells the inside story, the story you won’t get from typical media outlets, about the recent news out of Hong Kong about the sentencing of the Hong Kong 47, a group of pro-democracy advocates tried for sedition because they attempted to gain a pro-democracy majority on the legislative council in Hong Kong, something that had been allowed until the Communist Chinese forcibly altered Hong Kong’s “Basic Law” to prohibit such actions. Many of them have been in jail for nearly four years now.

But a couple interesting stories have come out of this persecution (and prosecution) that should make those of us in the free world sit up and notice and lift up prayers for the Chinese, and especially for these 47 prisoners. According to the mission’s newsletter:

One of them, an evangelist, has been faithfully preaching the Gospel every Sunday from his prison cell for the past three years. His courage is a profound reminder of the cost of faith in places where freedom is restricted. This also highlights the reality that Hong Kong is now fully under the control of China’s Communist Party leadership. How long before Hong Kong churches may face the same restrictions as those in China, potentially being forced to join the state-controlled Three-Self Patriotic Movement or go underground?[1]

This month’s newsletter from the ministry has other stories of the bravery of Chinese Christians not publicly affiliated with the pro-democracy movement who meet together for worship even in the face of close and contentious scrutiny from Chinese political and law-enforcement authorities. These believers are keenly aware of the promises of this morning’s gospel passage and trust God daily not to become victims of Chinese suppression.

Given these two stark contrasts between the relative ease we American believers have of gathering to worship and to freely speak versus the suppression and oppression of Chinese believers, this raises an important question for believers we don’t often discuss: “What does the Bible say about believers’ relationship with government?” How should we as Christ-followers live our lives whether in a relative state of freedom or facing oppression? On this Sunday, since we’ve got a patriotic theme today, I think it’s a good time to talk about this.

But first, just a brief history of the political situation in the Bible. We know that in the OT, much of the history of the Jews revolves around the monarchy that began under Saul and lasted over 400 years until the exile to Babylon in 586 B.C. After the exile, when they returned to the land, they seem to have been governed by religious leaders or governors for a time, until the OT goes silent around 400 B.C. We know Alexander the Great conquered the area late in the fourth century B.C., and controlled it until the Roman Republic conquered it in the second century B.C. By the time Jesus is born, the Roman republic had devolved into a monarchy with a perfunctory senate, and that is the government that rules Rome during the time of Jesus and the historical period covered by the New Testament.

Rome respected the Jewish religion and their independence. Herod, descended from the Jewish Maccabean family, was the regional King for Judea, but he was considered a Roman puppet. Rome’s primary concern was maintaining order and peace in the empire, so they typically had a hands-off approach when it came to the Jews, unless they sensed unrest among the masses. At the worst, it was a tentative peace, but we see signs in the gospels that some were looking for the Messiah to overthrow Roman rule and return them the glory days of the Davidic monarchy.

When it comes to how we should interact with government, then, I find it interesting that, in spite of the prevailing attitudes of the Jews toward Roman rule, Jesus never once says anything bad about the Roman government or about the way it operated in Judea and Galilee. In fact, in Luke 20:25, Jesus says “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”[2] Yet the mob that would have him crucified three chapters later accuses him of opposing the payment of taxes to Caesar. When Jesus stands before Pilate, he asks him if he’s the king of the Jews, and Jesus replies: “You have said so,” perhaps acknowledging (in a snarky way) that Pilate has the authority to proclaim him as such.

We’ll come back to Acts in a moment, but I first want to look at Romans 13, where Paul gives the clearest explanation of the what the believers’ relationship with government should be:

Paul used his natural-born citizen status to his advantage! He knew that Roman citizens had certain privileges and rights when it came to potential criminal charges, and the soldiers themselves seemed fearful that they had almost flogged a Roman citizen. I wonder if our political officials truly fear the citizenry and the power of our voices and our votes?

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor. [3]

Although Paul was speaking under a monarchy, his exhortation here seems to apply generally regardless of the form of government. Greece had democracies prior to Roman rule, but they were quite different from our democracies today. In our times, each State is a “laboratory” of democracy, as Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said in a 1932 decision. Our federal government is organized as a republic comprising the 50 democracies we call “States.” As citizens of a democracy, then, under a federal constitution that gives us significant personal freedoms, we have the right to speak, act, and vote to contribute to the good of the democracy. We should feel free to get involved at any level, if we’re so inclined. That could mean anything from speaking at or serving on a local governing board (city, school, planning, etc.) to working for the government in a civil position to serving as a State or U.S. Representative or Senator.

Most of us probably learned that our three branches of government serve as “checks and balances” so that no one branch of government gains too much power or influence. But our involvement in various levels of government, whether as citizens, public servants, or governing officials, can serve as a fourth means of checks and balances, especially if we’re not afraid to bring our Christian values to the table when appropriate.

Paul seems to have understood this in the book of Acts when he faces arrest and a potential beating at the hands of Roman soldiers. Here’s the exchange in Acts 22:23–29:

23 As they were shouting and throwing off their cloaks and flinging dust into the air, 24 the commander ordered that Paul be taken into the barracks. He directed that he be flogged and interrogated in order to find out why the people were shouting at him like this. 25 As they stretched him out to flog him, Paul said to the centurion standing there, “Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who hasn’t even been found guilty?”

26 When the centurion heard this, he went to the commander and reported it. “What are you going to do?” he asked. “This man is a Roman citizen.”

27 The commander went to Paul and asked, “Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?”

“Yes, I am,” he answered.

28 Then the commander said, “I had to pay a lot of money for my citizenship.”

“But I was born a citizen,” Paul replied.

29 Those who were about to interrogate him withdrew immediately. The commander himself was alarmed when he realized that he had put Paul, a Roman citizen, in chains.[4]

Did you see what happened there? Paul used his natural-born citizen status to his advantage! He knew that Roman citizens had certain privileges and rights when it came to potential criminal charges, and the soldiers themselves seemed fearful that they had almost flogged a Roman citizen. I wonder if our political officials truly fear the citizenry and the power of our voices and our votes?

Paul wasn’t finished, though, upon his arrest. Perhaps the perceived threat from the Jews who wanted to kill him (some had taken a vow to do so!), so instead of being released, as he could have been, he chose to appeal to Caesar. Under Roman law, this put several things into motion. First, Paul was assured the protection of Roman soldiers throughout his various trials. Second, he was assured of being able to proclaim the gospel before Roman rulers in each of his trial appearances. This fulfilled the words of Jesus to Ananias when he was told to go minister to Paul after his conversion experience: “This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel. 16 I will show him how much he must suffer for my name”[5] (Acts 9:15b–16).

The third thing that his appeal to Caesar does is assure him time to see that the Christian faith is well established in perhaps the largest city in the Mediterranean region. We know at the end of the book of Acts that Paul is essentially under house arrest in his own rented house, not in a jail, and he had the opportunity to meet and discuss the faith “with all boldness and without hindrance.”

As citizens of this great nation, then, we have innumerable freedoms available to us to proclaim the gospel and act faithfully, generally without fear of retribution. But even in a nation like China, we see those who are persecuted for their faith and the belief in freedom still find ways to proclaim the gospel even from prison. How much more then should we be so bold. I pray that we would use our freedoms to proclaim the gospel and work for freedom for the captives. Amen.

[1] C2C Update: November 2024

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

August 13, 2024

Debunking The Skeptics Annotated Bible (SAB): Romans 1:3

Filed under: 1 Chronicles,Biblical Studies,Birth Stories,Christology,Luke Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of,Reliability of Scripture,Romans,Skeptic's Annotated Bible — Scott Stocking @ 9:49 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

I’m down to preaching on just the last Sunday of the month now, so I thought I’d take a stab at some apologetic articles on my off weeks and make a series out of the posts. I’ve referenced before the work of Steve Wells, The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible (SAB), in which he categorizes several different types of what he considers to be deficiencies in the biblical text like perceived or apparent inconsistencies, worldviews that would not have even been considered in biblical times, and things he thinks are ridiculous or silly. He uses the King James Version of the Bible, which is probably in the public domain at this point, so he didn’t even choose a good modern translation to critique. His criticisms reflect an extremely shallow understanding of Scripture and the nature and character of ancient texts generally, so admittedly, his work is low-hanging fruit for those of us who are Bible ninjas when it comes to defending the faith.

Having said that, then, I’ll tackle Romans 1:3 in this article (≠329)[1], but it will lend itself to debunking some of the other related inconsistencies as well.

The first is Romans 1:3, citing the KJV text he uses:

3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;[2]

Here’s the 2011 NIV translation of the same verse:

3 regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life g was a descendant of David,[3]

And since this is a blog about Greek, I’ll throw in the Greek text for giggles.

3 περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ τοῦ γενομένου ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυὶδ κατὰ σάρκα,[4]

The question Wells asks here about the contradiction is: “Was Joseph the father of Jesus?” Under each entry in the index, he identifies other verses in the Bible that he has labeled with the same number and breaks the list down into the supposed contradictory answers. Interestingly enough, he seems to have his verses mixed up in the index entry, as he lists this particular verse under the “Yes” answer category, while the verses in Gospels for the birth stories of Jesus that explicitly identify Joseph as Jesus’s earthly “father” are under the “No” category.

First of all, basic common sense would leave most people to believe that “seed” is being used metaphorically here, not necessarily in reference to a biological child of the person who produced the “seed,” but more broadly to the concept of “descendant.” In fact, when the word for seed [σπέρμα (sperma), ατος (atos), τό (to)[5]] is not used to mean an actual seed of a plant, it appears in contexts where the concept of having descendants is emphasized (see, for example, Mark 12:20–22, the concept of levirate marriage). So Paul in Romans 1:3 isn’t talking about Jesus’s biological father (bio dad for you young ‘uns), but about Jesus coming from the lineage of David, through which the prophets of the Old Testament declared the Messiah would be born. Pretty straightforward, right?

But let’s not stop there, because if Paul had intended to say David was Jesus’s bio dad, he would have had a perfectly good Greek word to use, and he could have taken it straight from Matthew’s genealogy in Matthew 1:1–17, and as such, I’ll address some other contradictions (≠326 Matthew/Luke genealogy; ≠328 Who was Jesus’s paternal grandfather?; ≠261 Matthew/1 Chronicles genealogies; ≠325 number of generations) Wells identifies, the discrepancy between Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies. The Greek word γεννάω (gennaō), according to Louw-Nida’s reference, means “the male role in causing the conception and birth of a child—‘to be the father of, to procreate, to beget.’ ”[6] So this is yet another proof that there’s no need to identify a contradiction in Romans 1:3, because Paul didn’t use the same term as Matthew there.

But wait! It gets even better! While Matthew’s genealogy begins with Abraham, the father of God’s covenant people, and ends with Joseph, Luke’s genealogy begins with Joseph and goes backwards to creation and Adam, the first man (of whom Jesus is the archetype, that is, the firstborn of all creation). Matthew’s genealogy probably skips a generation here or there so he can fit it into his three “fourteen generations” pattern (by the way, 3 x 14 = 42, so Jesus is the answer to the question of “What is the meaning of life, the universe, everything?” Some of my readers will get that.). But you can trace the genealogy to a certain historical point from the end of Ruth and in 1 Chronicles 3:10–17.

The standard historical interpretation of Luke’s “alternate” genealogy is that it traces Jesus’s lineage back through Mary and not Joseph. Note that when Luke introduces the genealogy, he says “being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph” (Luke 3:23 KJV). But verse 23 is the only time we see the word for “son” in the Greek text. The rest of the genealogy is just the genitive form of the definite article, so it’s literally “Joseph of Heli of Matthat of Levi…” and so on. “Son of” can be fairly discerned from the context, but it’s possible Luke uses just the definite article to cover his bases in case someone is missing from the genealogy. We know nothing about Jesus’s grandparents on either side, so it’s possible that the simple “of” in the first instance (“of Heli”) is connecting Joseph to Mary’s parents or lineage. After all, in Jewish tradition, the child’s “Jewishness” comes from the mother.

This is just one example of the shallow and rather thoughtless and unscholarly opposition to the truth and integrity of Scripture you’ll find in Wells’ SAB. Your comments made in good faith are always welcome. If you’d like to read more critiques about the SAB, I want to recommend you to my colleague SlimJim’s blog, The Domain for Truth (wordpress.com). He is an outstanding apologist for the faith.

Peace,

Scott Stocking

My views are my own.

[1] NOTE: As I go forward in this series, I will “tag” the index numbers so you can easily search for the contradictions among my blog posts.

[2] The Holy Bible: King James Version. 2009. Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version. Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] Aland, Kurt, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini, Bruce M. Metzger, Maurice A. Robinson, and Allen Wikgren. 1993; 2006. The Greek New Testament, Fourth Revised Edition (with Morphology). Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.

[5] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.; those of you who know Greek will recognize that the noun is neuter, not masculine or feminine.

[6] Louw, Johannes P., and Eugene Albert Nida. 1996. In Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, electronic ed. of the 2nd edition., 1:256. New York: United Bible Societies.

June 1, 2024

Christianity and Nationalism: A Brief Survey of Biblical Passages

Filed under: 2 Chronicles,Biblical Studies,Ephesians,Eschatology,Government,Prayer,Proverbs,Romans,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 11:03 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

What is “Christian Nationalism”? Some might say it’s that this nation was founded by educated adults who, for the most part, believed in the God of the Bible, even if they did not hold a monolithic view of what his nature, personality, and characteristics were. Some may have been deists; some may have been predestinationists; others may have been open theists. Regardless, some have the view that our nation should “get back to its Christian roots,” that our laws should reflect the moral and ethical principles defined in the Christian Scriptures. But apart from a mention of “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God” and the phrase “endowed by their Creator” in the Declaration of Independence, that document doesn’t mention anything about any church, worship, or religion. We never see our founding fathers arguing too much about specific religions or religious viewpoints, at least not in our founding documents.

But that doesn’t mean their ideas about freedom, the free will of man to determine his own destiny apart from political or governmental overreach didn’t come from the Bible. It’s entirely possible that such a worldview was (and is) an underlying assumption supporting the principles of freedom they put forth. Many of the founding fathers had a classical education and had read some of the great works of Greeks and Romans, especially from the last half of the first millennium before Christ and a few hundred years after that. That would have included an education in Scripture as well, because the Greek and Roman material provided the sociocultural background for the growth and expansion of the early church. Their ideas about the best form of government to establish came from a wide variety of religious and secular sources full of stories about the ups and downs of ancient democracies, republics, monarchies, and so forth.

Another view that might be seen as Christian Nationalism is a little more generic. It’s not one that would seek to impose a strictly Christian or Judeo-Christian viewpoint be a test for government service, but one that expects a government and its servants to live up to the principles it has outlined in its founding documents. If the government says people should be free to worship as they choose and to associate with those they agree with, and for that matter free to not associate with those with whom they disagree if they so choose, then the expectation would be that the government should distance itself from any kind of religious disputes or regulations and truly allow people to be free in that regard. The moment the government says “You can’t express that view,” “You can’t associate with one another,” or “You must allow your enemies and detractors to associate with you,” they have crossed the line, and the people whom they govern have every right to call the government out on such interference.

I think for the vast majority of Christians, however, Christian Nationalism means you recognize that you are both a citizen of heaven the heavenly kingdom (John 18:36; Ephesians 2:19; Philippians 3:20) and a resident in the earthly kingdom (John 17:6–18, esp. vv. 11 & 16–18) doing your best to live out your heavenly purpose in the eyes of God. Each of us is responsible for our own salvation and our own relationship to God, but we also want to share the hope of Christ and eternal life with those around us. We have influence one person at a time. This is why Jesus said in John 17:9: “I pray for them [believers]. I am not praying for the world, but for those you have given me, for they are yours.” Jesus is most concerned about individual hearts, not about a world that will pass away.

Even though we live in a world that will one day pass away (some of us may be thinking that will happen sooner than later at this point), we still have concerns about the larger issues of oppression and corruption, a fair justice system, and care for the indigent and infirm, just as Jesus did in his day. While Jesus never once criticized the Roman government, he was not afraid to speak to Pilate or Herod in the hours leading up to his crucifixion. The most popular thing Jesus ever said about the Roman government was his response when asked about paying taxes: “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” Here’s the question for believers, then: How do we give back to Caesar while we’re still citizens in an earthly kingdom? I want to spend the rest of this article looking at Bible passages that have to do with our relationship and responsibilities with government and justice.

Old Testament

To lay a foundation, let me first start with Proverbs. While the Proverbs are not commands, they still reflect profound truths about life on earth. Proverbs 20:23[1] says, “The Lord detests differing weights, and dishonest scales do not please him.” This is primarily a reference to economic transactions, but the general principle behind it is to treat everyone fairly, to apply the same standard regardless of any social, economic, ethnic, or religious background. It’s no accident that “Lady Justice” wears a blindfold and holds a scale: that image comes from the underlying principle of this passage. When we see an injustice, it is up to Christians, and indeed all decent people who have a sense of fairness, to speak out in opposition to it and do what they can to seek its correction.

Perhaps the most popular verse that Christians like to turn to is 2 Chronicles 7:14, which is one line from the prophecy (vv. 12b–22) the Lord gave to Solomon after he finished building the temple and the royal palace. The Lord promised that after a time of catastrophe,[2] “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” Obviously, we cannot underemphasize the power of prayer for a nation, both individually and corporately wherever a body of believers is gathered. But the word to Solomon at this time was for him to walk faithfully as well. In that context, they were primarily governed by God’s decrees and laws.

In the American context, we would expect the rulers of America to abide by the decrees and laws on the books as well, otherwise, there will be trouble for those who don’t. We can already see, for example, how America is becoming “a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples” because our leaders are not following and upholding the long-held tenets of the U.S. Constitution. It really doesn’t matter whether we think the Constitution contains religious or Judeo-Christian principles: the Constitution is the foundation for our laws and rights as citizens, but if it’s not upheld, the leaders should expect trouble and blowback. We can see the warnings of this prophecy beginning to manifest themselves even today. There is nothing wrong with Christians using the power of their voice in a society that claims to respect the right to freedom of speech to call for political or spiritual “righteousness” in their leadership.

We see the prophecy of 2 Chronicles fulfilled in the story of Isaiah and Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 32; par. Isaiah 37), where they prayed to God for deliverance from Sennacherib’s siege. God heard their prayer and wiped out all 185,000 soldiers with his mighty hand. I’m not saying that’s how God would handle it in every situation, but if we don’t pray and do our part, would God think we’re not really invested in and reliant on his mighty power? Ephesians 1:19 says the power we have as believers “is the same as his mighty strength he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead.” That power, at least in large part, is represented by the Holy Spirit in our lives. We can be bold because we have that power. Let us not shrink back!

New Testament

As I said in the introduction, Jesus never once offers any commentary, positive or negative, on the form of Roman government he was living under. He’s just not concerned about that because that’s not his focus. His focus is establishing the kingdom of God. That is evidenced by his statement of giving back to Caesar what is his (Luke 20:25). In other words, he fully supported paying taxes. It is interesting, then, that just a few chapters later, in Luke 23:2, the mob accuses Jesus of opposing payment of taxes to Caesar! The old dipsy-do flip-a-roo, as Dan Bongino says. Some people might see Jesus’s response to Pilate in that setting as off-handed snark: Pilate asks Jesus if he’s the king of the Jews, and Jesus replies, “You have said so,” as if he’s accepting Pilate’s confirmation of that grant of royalty!

Before looking at Paul’s interaction with Roman rulers in Acts, I want to look at the book of Romans itself, namely the passage in Romans 13 where Paul directly addresses what the believers’ attitude should be toward governing authorities. Here’s 13:1–7 in its entirety:

Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.

6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor. [3]

The beauty of the American republic (and it is a republic, not a democracy according to the Constitution) is that our public representatives govern with the consent of the governed. As such, the founding fathers intended to be a mutual sharing of this power for which the people, if they so choose, could withdraw their consent at any time: the power to elect in most cases resides with the people, while the power to enact laws lies with the representatives so elected. The Constitution also states that the people in each State do NOT elect the president directly by virtue of the aggregate popular vote across all States, but that they elect electors dedicated to vote for the candidate who, in 48 States at least, wins the popular vote in each State.

By the time Christ was born, the Roman republic had been overthrown in favor of the autocracy of the Caesars. Rome still had the Senate as an artifact of the republic, but it had no real representative power. So when Paul writes Romans, he’s writing about an autocratic government under the rule of Caesar with regional governors or kings established in various localities. We see this hierarchy in the latter part of the book of Acts as he goes through his appeal process to Caesar.

In Paul’s day, then, Roman rulers feared wrongdoers because they could cause disruption in the empire. But they had no fear of the population generally because their tenures were not necessarily dependent on the consent of the governed. But as we’ll see when we look at Acts, they did have some fear of Roman citizens, who had special rights in Roman law, especially a right to a fair trial, so I believe we can offer a caveat here on Paul’s words: rulers and their enforcers do seem to have a certain level of fear of potentially mistreating a citizen. Having said that, let’s look at Paul’s interactions with Roman law enforcement and rulers in the book of Acts.

Acts: Paul’s Defense

The story of Paul’s arrest and subsequent appeals begins in Acts 21:27, where some Jews have Paul arrested by stirring up the crowd against him with, you guessed it, false charges that he had brought a Gentile into the temple. The Jews dragged Paul out of the temple and began to assault him with the intent to kill him. The Romans came and arrested Paul, not necessarily because of the false accusations, but because the Romans didn’t like unruly mobs and riots. Since Paul appeared to be at the center of the controversy, Paul got arrested, shackled, and carried (literally) off to the barracks amidst the riotous mob.

After a brief attempt to relay his conversion story to the angry mob, the crowd decided they still didn’t like him and resumed their calls to have him executed. At that point, the commander had had enough and ordered that Paul be flogged and interrogated to figure out why he was the main attraction at the riot. It is at this point that things get interesting with respect to Roman law and law enforcement, and we learn quite a bit about how Rome viewed citizens’ rights. Here’s the exchange from Acts 22:23–29:

23 As they were shouting and throwing off their cloaks and flinging dust into the air, 24 the commander ordered that Paul be taken into the barracks. He directed that he be flogged and interrogated in order to find out why the people were shouting at him like this. 25 As they stretched him out to flog him, Paul said to the centurion standing there, “Is it legal for you to flog a Roman citizen who hasn’t even been found guilty?”

26 When the centurion heard this, he went to the commander and reported it. “What are you going to do?” he asked. “This man is a Roman citizen.”

27 The commander went to Paul and asked, “Tell me, are you a Roman citizen?”

“Yes, I am,” he answered.

28 Then the commander said, “I had to pay a lot of money for my citizenship.”

“But I was born a citizen,” Paul replied.

29 Those who were about to interrogate him withdrew immediately. The commander himself was alarmed when he realized that he had put Paul, a Roman citizen, in chains. [4]

Paul knew his rights as a citizen of Rome, and he “turned the other cheek”[5] by claiming his Roman citizenship and thus de-escalating the situation. He knew he should never have been put in chains in the first place. He also knew Rome shouldn’t flog him unless he’d been found guilty in a fair trial. He wasn’t about to let himself get pummeled by cruel Roman soldiers. We shouldn’t let ourselves get pummeled or walked all over either. We must stand strong and claim our rights.

The commander and his subordinates were “alarmed” (φοβέομαι phobeomai, from which we get “phobia”) that his soldiers had put Paul in chains. The commander knew he could get in serious trouble for that. The same could be said for the interrogators. They withdrew immediately once they heard he was a natural-born citizen of Rome. They could smell the scandal brewing and wanted nothing to do with it. Politicians today are so drunk with power and corruption that they’ve lost their fear of the electorate. Maybe it’s time to change that, nonviolently of course.

After that, Paul was taken to Felix, but Felix took his own sweet time interviewing Paul and trying to figure out what to do with him. At the end of Acts 24, we find out that Felix is interested in Paul because he was hoping Paul would bribe him. Paul, as a citizen, was in prison for at least two more years after that, but was able to have visitors to care for his needs. Felix is replaced by Porcius Festus in Acts 24:27, who seems to want to resolve this situation quickly.

The Jews wanted Festus to bring Paul back to Jerusalem, because they were still committed to ambushing and killing Paul, but instead, Festus invited them to Caesarea where Paul was being held. It is in this exchange where we see Paul again assert his Roman citizenship rights. After more than two years, he must be frustrated with the slow progress of his case, so he’s anxious to move on as well. Here’s what Paul says after Festus asked Paul if he wanted to go back to Jerusalem to stand trial with the Jews:

10 Paul answered: “I am now standing before Caesar’s court, where I ought to be tried. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well. 11 If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!”

12 After Festus had conferred with his council, he declared: “You have appealed to Caesar. To Caesar you will go!” [6]

Paul is done playing the Jews’ game at this point. His appeal to Caesar essentially puts an end to the Jews plot to kill him because he becomes a protected prisoner at that point; he knows that they are obligated to get him to Rome alive to make his appeal to the Autocrat Caesar, who is also chief (only) justice of the Roman supreme court as well. Through all of this, Paul never gives up, never gives in, and ALWAYS asserts his rights as a citizen.

Paul has one more appearance before a Roman ruling official, King Agrippa, whom Paul speaks quite convincingly to in his defense of his ministry and the gospel. King Agrippa says to Festus at the end of Acts 26: “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.” In other words, the favorable ruling of a “lower court” was not sufficient to set Paul free. There was no escaping Paul’s appearance before Caesar, which is probably what Paul wanted anyway. He had availed himself of an incredible opportunity to present the Gospel to the highest levels of Roman government.

Conclusion

Unfortunately, the book of Acts ends before we find out what happened to Paul in Rome. But several principles of the believer dealing with government stand out here.

First, for American Christians who live in a society with (supposedly) guaranteed rights, Paul demonstrates that we can and should avail ourselves of those rights to affect our preservation. We should not simply give up those rights or become doormats for the oppressors, but we should be bold in defending our rights and ensure that the government knows they have something to lose if they unfairly or prejudicially deprive us of those rights. We should be the strong ones who take that stand. Otherwise, this would empower the government even more to continue that corruption and take advantage of even “the least of these” who may not have the means, the courage, or the wherewithal to fight back. After all, aren’t “the least of these” special to Jesus? If we fail them, we fail Jesus.

Second, make sure you understand all your rights afforded you by the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the other amendments, and the statutes and ordinances in your own State and town and wherever else you may travel. If you feel like someone is unfairly targeting you about some issue, you ALWAYS have the right to an attorney; and if you’re accused of something, exercise your Miranda rights to have an attorney present if authorities are questioning or interrogating you. Don’t allow warrantless searches of your property or even warrantless “interrogation” about others. Give the government a nonviolent reason to be afraid of how you might respond if your rights are violated.

Third, as much as you can, take every opportunity to share the gospel with those who need to hear or especially those who want to hear. Consider that sometimes, the person you’re talking to may not be the only one listening. Someone else may hear your testimony or message and be moved by it. Keep yourself “prayed up” as well. Make sure you’re faithful with church and group attendance; Bible reading, study, and meditation; and your family and marriage commitments as well. DON’T LOSE YOUR FAMILY!! You’ll need them for support in the tough times ahead.

Finally, much of what is going on in America right now seems to have a spiritual warfare component: good vs. evil; right vs. wrong. “Be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. Put on the full armor of God so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes” (Ephesians 6:10–11). I have already written quite a bit on spiritual warfare,[7] but the important thing to realize is that the “armor of God,” if you look up the references to the individual items in the Old Testament, always refers to armor that God himself wears (figuratively, of course). It’s not from some giant spiritual storehouse; it’s God’s own armor. Knowing you have that defensive protection can give you even greater assurance as you speak boldly in his name.

I’m sure there is much more I could say from a biblical perspective on this matter, but I trust this gives the reader enough to go on and stay motivated to defend your freedoms, your family, and your faith. As for the title “Christian Nationalism,” remember it’s just a title the media likes to use and distort to make Christians look bad. Love your country but remember that your first allegiance is always to God. Peace to all of you, and may God bless the United States of America!

My opinions are my own.

Scott Stocking

[1] See also Leviticus 19:15, 35–36; Job 31:5–8; Proverbs 11:1, 16:10–15; Ezekiel 45:9–12; Hosea 12:7; Amos 8:5; Micah 6:11.

[2] Although only three catastrophes are mentioned (drought, locusts, and plague), these are merely examples given of natural catastrophes akin to the plagues on Egypt and, by extension, any socio-political catastrophes as well.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] For a discussion about turning the other cheek as an effort to de-escalate a situation, see my article Getting Naked for Jesus: A Lesson on Loving Your Enemy

[6] The New International Version. Acts 25:10–12; emphasis mine. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] Spiritual Warfare in Ephesians; Helmet of Salvation; The Lord’s Prayer: Deliver Us from the Evil One.

March 13, 2024

How God Loved the World: John 3:14–21; Numbers 21:4–9

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Christology,Christology,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Hebrew,John Gospel of,Lent,Numbers,Repentance,Romans,Soteriology,Theophany — Scott Stocking @ 8:41 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This message was preached on the Fourth Sunday of Lent, Year B (March 10, 2024), at Mount View Presbyterian Church. Text is lightly edited for publication.

IMPORTANT NOTE: I’ve now added an e-mail option to the blog so you can contact me directly. scott.stocking@sundaymorninggreekblog.com.

“Snakes. Why did it have to be snakes?” I think most of us remember that classic line from Raiders of the Lost Ark. Indiana, Sallah, and several workers have just opened up the roof of a long-buried crypt that was home to the Ark of the Covenant to reveal a “moving floor” about 30 feet below them. Indiana drops a torch down to reveal why the floor was moving: thousands of snakes. Of course, the best line in the movie comes right after that, though, delivered by John Rhys-Davies: “Asps, very dangerous. You go first.”

The Israelites must have had a similar response to Moses and to God when they had finally pushed God to his limit with all their complaining in their 40-year wilderness journey. The story is told in Numbers 21:4–9. They were impatient; they didn’t have any “real” bread; no water; and they hated what God had provided for them. Basically two million disgruntled souls who were trying to rough it out, knowing in their hearts they had to keep going for their children, because they had already lost their shot at dwelling in the Promised Land. God sent a bunch of poisonous, or “fiery” snakes to bite them. Some of them died, but the people pleaded with Moses and with God to save them from yet another judgment for their disbelief and unfaithfulness.

God told Moses to fashion what in Hebrew is called a saraph (שָׂרָף śārāp̄), a bronze serpent that itself must have had a fiery appearance in the desert sun, and put it on a pole so the Israelites who were bitten could look upon it and live. However, it did nothing for those who had already died. This bronze serpent was not an idol originally but rather something akin to a sign of judgment on the Israelites. It couldn’t save them from the pain of being bitten by the snakes, but it would save them from the poison that had entered their bodies. Something else was absorbing the fatal penalty of their disbelief. It’s a bit of a mystery why the word for the winged angels, or seraphim, of Isaiah 6 is also translated snake or serpent elsewhere. Regardless of the specifics of what it looked like, it must have fostered some measure of fear among the Israelites. “You can look at the scary bronze snake, or you can die from the real ones.”

As we read in our gospel passage this morning from John 3:14 and following, Jesus uses this story as a comparison to his own ultimate purpose for his incarnation. Even at the very beginning of the gospel, we get a preview of Jesus’s crucifixion and death even as Jesus has just finished speaking to Nicodemus about being “born again.” Jesus would be lifted up, but not as a king on a throne, a powerful warhorse, or carried on litter, but as a crucified savior on the cross. Look at the frightening image of what our own “poison,” our sin, has done to him and believe in God’s ultimate salvation, or walk away thinking it’s all over with and the cause is lost. Fortunately for us, the disciples did not choose the latter course of action.

This brings us to one of the most beloved and well-known verses of the Bible, John 3:16. “16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”[1] Most Bible translations put this paragraph from verses 16–21 on Jesus’s lips, but the NIV seems to think this verse and what follows is commentary added by John as he writes the gospel story. That’s a moot point, however, because regardless of who said it, it’s still true, right? Nevertheless, it seems to make sense to put these words in Jesus’s mouth, given he says some very similar things later in this gospel.

We can break verses 16–21 into two distinct sections. Verses 16–18 speak of “condemnation,” or the “perish” part of vs. 16. Verses 19–21 hearken back to the opening verses of John’s gospel by saying Jesus is the light. Let’s look at the condemnation section first and the conditions around that.

Notice first that Jesus says God’s purpose is that those who believe in him will inherit eternal life. This would have stuck in the craw of the Sadducees because a consequence of not believing in the resurrection was not believing in eternal life in God’s kingdom. Of course, this early on, the Jews may not have fully grasped that concept yet since many were expecting a physical kingdom and the overthrow of Rome. Eternal life is the opposite of “perish.” “Perish” at least refers to a spiritual death of sorts here, but it may also include physical death and perhaps even one’s own “extinction.” Jesus seems to have said this a slightly different way in Matthew 10:28: “Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.”[2]

Jesus also affirms the negative of this is NOT true, that is, it was NOT God’s purpose to have Jesus condemn the world, as such condemnation would lead to death. Only God the Father does the condemning. Although Jesus would have his fiery moments with the often times smug religious leaders of his day, his ultimate purpose was to get people to see a more excellent way, that of loving one another.

Jesus also says that people must “believe” or “have faith” in him. To some, that may sound like a simple mental assent to acknowledge Jesus as Savior. But the Greek word for believe (πιστεύω pisteuō) implies much more than that. It’s not just head knowledge, but heartfelt action as well. Another well-known passage from Romans 8:1–2 puts it this way: “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, 2 because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death.”[3] The “therefore” in Romans 8:1 refers to the arguments Paul has put forth in the first seven chapters of Romans, where Paul speaks of counting ourselves dead to sin (Romans 6:11), about the significance of our baptism (6:1–10), and about how our suffering for the sake of righteousness produces perseverance, character, and hope (5:3–5), among other things, all of which are demonstrated in the way we live our lives. Notice also how Paul describes Jesus’s role in all this in 5:15: “But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many.”

We also see this in Hebrews 5:11–6:12, where the author says the new believers can’t keep living on baby food. They’re in danger of falling away if they don’t grow their faith and do the hard things and the necessary things that lead to maturity. It’s spiritual “adulting.” Ephesians 2:8–10 says we’re saved by grace because we are God’s workmanship, created to walk in the good works he’s prepared in advance for us to do. Jesus’s half-brother James says faith without works is dead and useless (2:20). The works don’t save you, but they demonstrate your faith. The more you practice that, the stronger your faith becomes and the less likely you’ll fall away.

Those who have a strong, active faith don’t need to fear condemnation, then, as Jesus says in 3:18. On the flip side, if you know you’re not doing much to grow your faith, those seeds of doubt and condemnation can start to take root and grow. Consider this: those who have been called by God are partners with God in showing his love. Jesus brings this home in the last three verses of our passage today when he says, “This is the judgment.” By judgment, he means here is the standard by which you will be judged. Let’s see what that standard is.

The standard, of course, is Light, or more appropriately, the Light of the world, Jesus, and his message. Jesus uses the word light (φῶς phōs) five times in verses 19–21. This hearkens back to the opening of John’s gospel, where John describes Jesus in verse 9 as “The true light that gives light to everyone.” In the first nine verses of John’s gospel, John uses the word light six times. The word is found 12 more times from chapters 5 through 12, with half of those occurrences at the end of chapter 12. But starting in chapter 13, where Jesus washes the disciples’ feet at the Last Supper, neither John nor Jesus ever mention the word light again in the remainder of his Gospel.

In the three chapters of John where the word light is used the most, we do see Jesus repeating John’s opening words in chapter 1 and his own words from chapter 3, no doubt for emphasis. Listen to the similar language from the three chapters, and you’ll pick up on why John stops using the word light after chapter 12 (all passages from NIV):

John 1:5: “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”

John 1:9: “The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world.”

John 3:19: “Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.”

John 3:21: “Whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.”

John 12:35: “You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you.”

John 12:36: “Believe in the light while you have the light, so that you may become children of light.”

In those last two verses from John 12 I just read, Jesus emphasizes to his disciples to take advantage of every moment they have left with Jesus as he approaches his trial and crucifixion. By this point, it seems the disciples are starting to have some sense of what is about to happen, but they’re still in a fog about it. They do and will have the light, but there is no way they can anticipate the gut wrench from the events about to unfold among them.

Jesus’s final mention of light comes in John 12 46–47, and this is a fitting verse to wrap up this message, because Jesus repeats what he said about him self in our passage this morning.

46 “I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness.

47 “If anyone hears my words but does not keep them, I do not judge that person. For I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world.[4]

Even though Jesus did not come to judge, I know it must have broken his human heart each time someone rejected his message. Jesus came to show God’s love and compassion to those oppressed under a strict religious legalism. But he also was not afraid to say and do the hard things to confront evil among his people and in the world around him. He knew he couldn’t give people hope if he also didn’t break the old order and establish a new kingdom in the hearts of his followers. As we approach Easter, let us be lights in this world of darkness to draw people to the hope of Jesus. Amen.

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

March 3, 2024

The Eighth Commandment, the Eighth Amendment, and Cancel Culture

Filed under: 1 Peter,Biblical Studies,Courage,Exodus,Government,Hebrew,Romans,Spiritual Warfare,Ten Commandments (Decalogue) — Scott Stocking @ 5:37 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Abstract: This article looks at the Eighth Commandment (“Do not steal”), the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Amendment in the Bill of Rights (prohibitions against excessive bail and cruel and unusual punishment), and how cancel culture and the radical Left’s “lawfare” are violations of those sacred rights and obligations. (NOTE: Copublished on both my sites: Sustainable America and Sunday Morning Greek Blog.)

Background and Basis

Why do so many want the Ten Commandments and depictions of Moses receiving the tablets on Mount Sinai displayed in public buildings? Is it because that event is the most accessible ancient account we have of any kind of law making or law giving, especially as it relates to a standard established by someone beyond ourselves? Is it because many people recognize that our standards of behavior and our culture should not come from the fleeting whims of flawed mankind? Is there a difference between being a “Christian Nation” and a nation founded on enduring Judeo-Christian values?

How are those of us who are followers of Christ to understand Paul’s exhortations in Romans 13:1–7 and 1 Peter 2:13 about being “subject to [human] governing authorities,” especially if those authorities themselves show no evidence of following Christ or even respecting a Judeo-Christian worldview? The United States is, after all, a nation founded on the concept that “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them” “to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station” that all other nations have. The Founding Fathers appeal “to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of [their] intentions” and cite the “Authority of the good People of these Colonies” to declare their independence from the British Crown.

The result of the Declaration of Independence is that the United States adopted the foundational governing document, the U.S. Constitution, in which the United States agrees to “guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government” (Article IV, Section 4). Given what both these founding documents say in regards to our form of government, what responsibilities do we bear as we live and work in this Republic?

Because the United States is supposed to be a Republic (“if you can keep it”; Ben Franklin), the Representatives we elect by a democratic process govern at the consent of the governed. So we DO have a say in what our government does and how our government acts. We have a God-given RIGHT to freedom of speech and religion; we have a right to bear arms; we have a right to petition the government for a redress of grievances; we have a right to be protected against unreasonable searches and seizures without probable cause.

One important caveat here that I’ll address later: Nowhere in these two documents is the United States ever described as a “democracy.” In a democracy, all citizens vote on everything. We do not have a true democracy in that sense. True democracies in Ancient Greece often led to the power flowing to those who had money and influence and not to the benefit of the people.

One of the practices in those democracies, ostracism, is at the heart of my discussion in the article today. This article compares the Eighth Commandment (by Protestant enumeration), the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and demonstrates how the ancient practice of ostracism by mob rule has crept back into our political landscape, in spite of the Founding Fathers’ attempts to squelch such practices in the Constitution.

The Eighth Commandment in Context

The Eighth Commandment (Exodus 20:15), at least according to Protestant enumeration, simply states “You shall not steal.” It’s just two words in Hebrew; there’s no object of the verb, direct or indirect. However, the two commandments that follow, “You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor” and “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house, etc.”[1] may give us some clues about the extent of the command, namely, that it is intended broadly not to just include petty theft, but more serious misdemeanors and felonies.

The fact that the last two items focus on “your neighbor,” along with the extended part of the Sabbath commandment, suggests that the focus of the commandments is primarily about what happens within the covenant community of Israel. “Neighbor” is not just the person who lives next door or across the street. A neighbor is someone who is part of your covenant community. They could live near you, or they could be a resident of your town or city, big or small; they could be your coworker; they could be a fellow church member.

One need only to look at Exodus 21 to see that this is a reasonable conclusion. I have written more extensively about this in my post Does the Structure of Exodus 21:1–27 Tell the Patriarchs’ Story?, so I won’t go into too much detail here. I’ll focus on a couple things here. First, “You shall not murder” is not a general prohibition against any form of homicide. It excludes killing in war or self-defense. It focuses primarily on terminating the life of someone unjustly or out of anger, not on accident (see Exodus 21:12–14).

The two edicts about attacking and cursing your parents in 21:15 and 17 are worthy of capital punishment as well, even though they say nothing about whether the parents were killed. Exodus 21:16, however, gives us the important clue for understanding the severity with which the Eighth Commandment is treated. The word used for “steal” in Exodus 20:15 is the same word used for kidnapping in 21:16 (word-for-word translation): “Anyone who steals a man is to be put to death.” This idea suggests to some scholars that perhaps the original commandment had something to do with a more serious form of stealing that could result in the death penalty, but that is not a debate to be solved here.

I mentioned the Ninth and Tenth Commandments. The Tenth Commandment appears to be addressing more of a thought crime, a crime of desire. But many commentators believe “coveting” not only addresses your thoughts, but any illicit plans you might be considering to obtain the things you covet. In other words, coveting is “planning the heist,” fulfilling your desire to “steal” what is not yours. So you can see how the Ninth Commandment also might play into that; trumping up a charge against your neighbor so you can get something that is otherwise rightfully theirs. Proverbs 3:29–30 reflects the tone of these last three commandments:

29 Do not plot harm against your neighbor,

who lives trustfully near you.

30 Do not accuse anyone for no reason—

when they have done you no harm.[2]

What conclusions can we draw from this? First, kidnapping, or “stealing a man,” is about removing someone from their covenant community, especially if you sell them off into slavery as Joseph’s brothers did to him. Joseph’s fate was eventually his family’s fate as famine forced them relocate to Egypt after they learned Joseph had risen to power in Egypt. After the memory of Joseph’s heroic rescue of Egypt through their own famine faded, the Egyptian rulers enslaved the Israelites, thus preventing them from returning to their Promised Land for a time.

Second, murder, of course, removes a person from the covenant community permanently and has additional community issues for the deceased’s family. It may force the family to relocate to a safer place, especially if they are also targets of the murderer. It is the ultimate form of stealing: stealing someone’s very existence.

Third, false accusations, trumped up charges, overcharging someone, or even fabricating charges where there was no harm to anyone can cause reputational damage such as to bring shame or reproach on a person where none is deserved. Middle Eastern cultures, including Judaism, place a great deal of importance on the concepts of honor versus shame. Shame can force you out of your “in group” and cause you to relocate from your covenant community. When the penalties, especially monetary penalties, exceed the nature and seriousness of the alleged crime, this gives the appearance of targeting someone for reasons other than justice.

Those who conspire to violate any or all of these three (at least) commandments work together creating a platform for ostracism. The term “ostracism” reflects the practice in ancient Athens around the 5th century B.C.E. and is based on the use of the pottery shards (ostraka) used to cast votes for those whom they wanted ostracized. But the practice is more ancient than that.

For example, Pharaoh’s enslavement of the Hebrews (Exodus 1:8–14) was a form of ostracism because he feared the power of their growing population. Pharaoh couldn’t control their growing population by enslavement, so he took the ostracism to the next level and ordered the midwives to kill any Hebrew boys as soon as they were born (Exodus 1:15–19), but the midwives rightly had ethical problems with this practice of infanticide (read “post-birth abortions”) and refused to follow through. As a final plague, God punished the Egyptians with Pharaoh’s own edict and killed all the Egyptian first-born males and first-born cattle.

By now, if you’re political aware of what’s transpiring in the 2024 presidential campaign, you’ve probably already figured out where I’m going with this. Let me cut to the chase, then, and switch to discussing the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The Eighth Amendment in Context

The Eighth Amendment is short and to the point about the God-given right it enshrines: “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” It doesn’t take much of a leap of faith or the exercise of political analysis to see how this Amendment in our Bill of Rights can be understood in terms of the Eighth Commandment. Let me offer another caveat here before I dive in: If someone has committed criminal acts, and there is sufficiently demonstrated probable cause to demonstrate that is the case, then the use of the law to prosecute such persons or entities is fully justified; what I’m discussing here is when such probable cause has not been demonstrated or it’s clear that there is political “lawfare” at work.

When the power of the law is unjustly wielded for political purposes, this is a clear violation of the Eighth and Ninth Commandments. Many people who were peacefully ushered into the Capitol on January 6, 2021, by Capitol Hill police holding the doors open for them are still in jail to this day for their supposed “insurrection.” One man who entered peacefully and conducted himself peacefully committed suicide because the Justice Department trumped up the charges against him without any solid video evidence or other damning evidence.

The J6 protestors were removed from their respective covenant communities simply because they wanted a chance to be heard when they were clearly being ostracized, minimalized, and villainized by the Democrats and media who couldn’t see the obvious corruption right before their eyes. Their “Stop the Steal” signs were evidence of how widely and sincerely We the People did not trust the conduct of the election in several States. We the People believe the election was stolen through nefarious means. None of the challenges raised were ever judged on their merits. This article may eventually be ostracized just for me saying this.

Of course, the latest example of this is the excessive bail imposed on President Trump (with interest accruing daily) on his NY “fraud” trial for acts that had no victims, no financial loss for anyone involved, and positive reviews from those who had financial interactions with him. There was no jury, Trump was often not allowed to defend himself, and only two people were involved in the prosecution: a DA who campaigned on “getting Trump” and a judge who had made documented biased statements against Trump. Their bilateral action against Trump without a jury of peers guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. That is a clear violation of both constitutional law and the biblical commandments. The intent is clear and has been confirmed by the statements of those involved: they don’t want the American people to vote for a popular candidate. They’re trying to run him out of New York and Florida, trying to remove him from his childhood home and his current covenant community.

[I added the following paragraph on 03/04/24 based on a comment from BereanCrossroads. Check out that blog for your encouragement. Much thanks, BC!] The story of Naboth’s Vineyard is a pretty close parallel to what is happening to President Trump with respect to his alleged fraud trial in NYC. I’m kicking myself a bit for not making this connection, especially since one of my better sermons in my early years of preaching was telling that story from the perspective of Ahab. The story is found in 1 Kings 21. King Ahab wanted Naboth’s beautifully curated vineyard, but he was not willing to give up his family’s land and inheritance. Ahab’s wife, Jezebel, arranged a feast for Naboth, but also hired two “scoundrels” who falsely accused Naboth of blasphemy, which led to Naboth’s stoning. Ahab and Jezebel seized his vineyard after that. Ahab humbled himself afterwards but that didn’t last long. Both he and Jezebel suffered the fates that Elijah had prophesied for them (1 Kings 22:29–40; 2 Kings 9:30–37). The story is a perfect example of the what the Eighth, Ninth, and Tenth Commandments prohibited. You don’t need me to tell you who in the Trump fraud case represents the three main characters of the story of Naboth’s Vineyard.

Cancel Culture

Cancel Culture is a modern-day “revival” of the ancient practice of ostracism. I can remember as far back as the 1990s when I was a campus minister at Northern Illinois University when the buzz-phrase then was “Political Correctness.” You couldn’t say you didn’t agree with mainstreaming homosexual “marriage” without getting the accusation of “hate speech” hurled against you. The problem has gotten much worse since then, with individuals and organizations from all walks of life have been fired from their jobs, deplatformed from YouTube and Twitter, and demonetized by Internet payment services just for expressing political opinions contrary to a certain political point of view or for questioning some of the restrictions and analyses related to COVID. In a nation that has freedom of speech and religion and other God-given rights, we should not have to worry about any consequences for expressing our opinions and beliefs unless they represent a clear and present danger to others.

Cancel Culture is a grievous evil being perpetuated on our society and an obvious violation of both the Eighth Commandment and the Eighth Amendment. Getting fired, being deplatformed, or being demonetized for expressing your political opinion is “cruel and unusual punishment” in a free society. The interesting thing about the Eighth Amendment is that it doesn’t say anything about who is restricted from inflicting “cruel and unusual punishment.” So it just doesn’t apply to the courts. It applies to anyone who perpetuates Cancel Culture.

Lord, let the faithful arise and confront the evils in our society. Let your truth be proclaimed to all people. May your kingdom come and your will be done. In Jesus’s name, AMEN!

Scott Stocking

My opinions are my own.

If you like this article, you may also like the following:

Rachel Weeping: The Objectification of Gender and Children

Toxic Masculinity: Walking Like an Egyptian Pharaoh (2021 Update)

[1] Catholics and Lutherans combine the first two commands (no other gods, no idols) into one and split the “covet” commandments into two, making the one about coveting the house the ninth commandment and the one about coveting everything else the tenth commandment.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

April 13, 2023

Some Thoughts on Inerrancy

Filed under: 2 Peter,2 Timothy,Biblical Studies,Deuteronomy,Faith, Faithfulness,Hebrews,John Gospel of,Luke Gospel of,Psalms,Reliability of Scripture,Romans,Textual Criticism — Scott Stocking @ 11:00 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your ancestors had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.[1]

Your word is a lamp for my feet, a light on my path.[2]

Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.[3]

Again Jesus said, “Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.” And with that he breathed on them and said, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone’s sins, their sins are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”[4]

For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”[5]

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God p may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.[6]

For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.[7]

Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.[8]

The other night, just before I was ready to turn in, a long-time acquaintance and friend, Terry, IM’d me and asked me about biblical inerrancy. I hadn’t really given that much thought since seminary because I’ve been pretty settled on the issue for some time, but I thought I’d put down a few of my thoughts that came to mind as he and I briefly chatted.

  1. I believe 2 Timothy 3 that God’s word is inspired, that is, God-breathed. However, I also believe he speaks it both directly and through his fallible servants in a fallen world. He did this through his prophets in an authoritative way, but I don’t doubt that they may have added “local color” to their prophecies.
  2. I believe Jesus commissioned his apostles (and perhaps a few of their successors) with an ex cathedra authority, tempered by mutual accountability, to establish the primitive structure of the early Christian communities, the core doctrines of the faith, and vital practices to share and spread that faith. I do not believe this ex cathedra authority survived past the first or second generation of believers.
  3. I believe the historical books of the OT, from Genesis through Kings and Chronicles, were collated from extant copies of original writings and official journals. Some of these texts have obvious signs of an editor long after the recorded events took place (e.g., 2 Chronicles 20:26).
  4. I believe the Hebrews had in place a diligent process to copy their texts to ensure their accuracy and fidelity from one generation of texts to the next.
  5. I believe the NT autographs (original letters and Gospels) were without error doctrinally and textually. However, since we can be relatively certain that none of these have survived the ravagees of time, this statement has qualified significance. As the letters were copied in scriptoriums, human error inevitably made its way into the successive copies.
  6. I believe the science of the study of textual transmission is more than sufficient in most cases to identify when and where these errors entered into the text and which of the variant readings are the most reliable. I do not believe any of the disputed variations affect any doctrine of Scripture, especially since most doctrines do not rely solely on any one single text. The eclectic Greek text is the best modern version to use, as it takes into account the opinions and research of several qualified scholars.
  7. I believe “the Church of Christ on earth is essentially, intentionally, and constitutionally one”[9]; the differences we see among and within denominational traditions are reflections of the diversity of God’s kingdom. If we can appreciate the diversity in God’s creation, with hundreds of different varieties within each species, then why should we expect that the local manifestations of the church be copycats? I do not believe that such diversity, by itself, disqualifies the Scriptures in any way.
  8. I believe that anyone who can hear or read the Word of God translated into their own language, regardless of version, can understand and respond to the Gospel at its most basic level. The study of the Word of God in its original languages adds depth and color to the story and may convince some who think the principles taught therein are archaic, pedantic, or irrelevant.
  9. I believe that above all else, love for one another founded in the love God has shown and is still showing us is the highest virtue for the Christ-follower at least, and for all humanity generally, regardless of their belief. Love is necessary for the survival of the human race; faith and faithfulness are necessary for salvation; hope is necessary for our security in the faith and our strength to love one another. All other arguments pale in comparison to the power and testimony of faith, hope, and love.

Of course, this list is nowhere close to exhaustive, but I pray that it gets you, the reader, thinking about what you believe about Scripture and the testimony you bear as Christ-followers. Peace to all!

My thoughts are my own, and annotated when borrowed from elsewhere.

NOTE: If you have some other Scriptures you’d like to add on the reliability of God’s word, feel free to add them in the Comments section. I’d love to hear from you!

Scott

[1] Deuteronomy 8:3. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] Psalm 119:105. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Luke 21:33. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] John 20:21–23. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] Romans 1:16–17. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] 2 Timothy 3:16–17. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] Hebrews 4:12. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[8] 2 Peter 3:15–16. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[9] Campbell, Thomas. Declaration and Address.

March 12, 2023

A Woman, a Well, and Worshipping God (John 4; Romans 5:1–11)

Filed under: "I Am" Statements,Biblical Studies,Christology,Courage,Ecclesiology,Isaiah,John Gospel of,Life of Christ,Old Testament,Romans,Soteriology,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 8:53 pm
Tags: , , , , ,

I preached this message on March 12, 2023, Third Sunday in Lent, at Mt. View Presbyterian Church. The Gospel text was pretty much the entire chapter of John 4, so instead of reading all that, I showed a clip from The Chosen, Season 1, Episode 8, where Jesus encounters the woman at the well. Unfortunately, I forgot to record the message, so I do not have an audio file to share with you at this time.

Someone might think John was trying to create scandal from the very first words of his Gospel. In the first couple verses, he claims Jesus is God and was present at creation. The Jewish leaders would have considered that blasphemy. John the Baptizer, who is NOT the same John who wrote this gospel, goes on to claim he is the one sent to prepare the way for the Messiah, and upon Jesus’s baptism, John declares him to be the Son of God.

Then, instead of picking the leading religious rulers of his day, Jesus chooses a few fishermen and other average, everyday men to be in his band of disciples. After that, instead of his first miracle being a healing or exorcism, he decides to make about 180 gallons of premium wine so the party can keep going at the wedding. Then John throws in a story about Jesus cleansing the temple of the money changers and about how he’ll be able to rebuild the temple in three days if it’s destroyed. In John 3, he declares that belief in him ensures eternal life. Again, probably grounds for blasphemy if he were just an ordinary man.

And so we come to John chapter 4, and the scandalous behavior continues. How dare he travel through Samaria! His disciples would have rather walked the extra distance around Samaria rather than soil their sandals with the dust of that land. How dare he talk to a Samaritan woman, let alone ask her for a drink from Jacob’s well, especially when the rest of his followers aren’t around. Don’t you know, Jesus, that we’re not supposed to even touch the Samaritans let alone eat and drink with them?

Many of you know that the Gospel of John is unique in that it has many stories about Jesus’s ministry that are not reflected in the synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Many think that John may have organized his Gospel theologically rather than chronologically. For example, the story of Jesus clearing the temple, which is found in chapter 2 of John’s gospel, is placed in the last week of Jesus’s ministry. It’s not clear whether this is the same story, or if there were two different episodes when Jesus cleared the temple.

Jesus is in the land of his ancestors, so it seems fitting, at least to John, that Jesus would want to reveal himself first to his ancestors.

For the sake of argument, then, I’m going to assume there’s a theological message John is trying to get across here: He establishes Jesus is fully divine and that God is his Father. Since he’s God’s “only begotten” on Earth, Jesus then is the primary authority in the Temple, which the Jews believed was home of God’s presence. Finally, Jesus, having been established as the authority for the Jewish religion, essentially abolishes the long-standing prejudice against Samaria by going to the place where his ancestor Judah’s father, Jacob (renamed Israel) first established himself in the Promised Land after returning from Laban’s home. I think this aspect of the story lends to its credibility and to the principle of worship he puts forth.

One of the most important things to note about this encounter with the woman is that Jesus actually takes the time to have a real conversation with the woman, although he slowly reveals that he knows more about her than she thinks he knows. Jesus is in the land of his ancestors, so it seems fitting, at least to John, that Jesus would want to reveal himself first to his ancestors. That would be like me going to the Stocking Township, named after my great, great, great grandfather in the Wahoo area, or perhaps even to the historic site of the 12th-century Stocking Abbey in England, where my ancestors likely came from and ministering to a congregation in either of those places.

So what can we learn from the encounter between Jesus and this woman? The first thing is that Jesus did not recognize the ethnic boundaries that existed in his day and age. The Samaritans followed only the Torah, the five books of Moses, but not the prophets who came later. So they were a people who had deep Jewish roots, but because the Northern Kingdom had been conquered within a couple generations of rise of the prophets and the prohibition against intermarriage had been abandoned, they had little connection to the prophets and they were no longer considered “pure” Jews. The Jews considered them unclean. That didn’t matter to Jesus, though. He wanted the Samaritans to know that a “prophet” had returned to the area after some 700 years,

Because the Jews considered Samaritans unclean, they weren’t permitted to eat or drink from any of any of their plates or vessels. And the fact that she was divorced several times, well beyond what Jewish law would have permitted to remain in good standing, added to her social stigma among her own people not to mention the Jews. This is another barrier that Jesus would shatter: that it was okay to eat and drink with “sinners” and other outcasts like tax collectors.

The other New Testament text from today’s lectionary reading is Romans 5:1–11. Verses 6–8 say this:

6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.[1]

Did you catch that? This is really important to understand. When we cry out to God for help, does he say “Quit your womanizing! Quit lying! Quit getting drunk! Then you can come to me and I’ll consider your request?” By no means! That passage doesn’t say Christ died for those who’ve cleaned up their lives first. It says Christ died for the ungodly, while we were still sinners! That sounds like we can have a great weight lifted from us so we can see more hope and more light at the end of whatever dark tunnel sin has led us through. God loves us even before we realize that his love is the greatest gift of all, even when we think we may not be worthy of it. That’s grace!

The offer of “living water” is the centerpiece of the story. Parts of this story hearkens back to Isaiah 49:6 and 10, a prophecy about the Servant of the Lord and the restoration of Israel:

5 And now the Lord says—

he who formed me in the womb to be his servant

to bring Jacob back to him

and gather Israel to himself,

for I am honored in the eyes of the Lord

and my God has been my strength—

6 he says:

“It is too small a thing for you to be my servant

to restore the tribes of Jacob

and bring back those of Israel I have kept.

I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,

that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.

…

10 They will neither hunger nor thirst,

nor will the desert heat or the sun beat down on them.

He who has compassion on them will guide them

and lead them beside springs of water. [2]

This woman seems to have been suffering for some time because she felt like she needed to draw water in the heat of the day. We don’t know very much about her personal life aside from the divorces; no indication she had any children or what her current relationship was like. This leads us to another principle at play here: Don’t be afraid to speak to someone about whatever it is in their life that is holding them back from a full and vibrant relationship with God. Now Jesus had some special knowledge of her situation here, so he holds the advantage, but it’s for her benefit ultimately. Once he discloses what he knows about her marital status, she understands not only that Jesus is a prophet, but she also believes his claim that he is the Messiah and shared that convincingly with many people in her town.

Don’t be afraid to speak to someone about whatever it is in their life that is holding them back from a full and vibrant relationship with God.

Jeremiah mentions a couple times (2:13; 17:13) about how his listeners have “forsaken the LORD, the spring of living water.” But Zechariah, when prophesying about the second coming of Christ and the consummation of history, says this in 14:8:

On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter.

9 The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one Lord, and his name the only name.[3]

This is the ultimate and absolute promise of fulfillment we can look forward to when we humble ourselves before God and accept his free gifts of reconciliation and salvation. God will be in total control. No more crying, pain, or grief, just living eternally in the glory of God’s light.

Turning back to Romans 5 for a moment, Paul describes what happens when we come into that justification, and the woman seems to have experienced that, especially with respect to addressing the own suffering she had experienced for so long. Listen to verses 1–5:

Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we boast in the hope of the glory of God. 3 Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; 4 perseverance, character; and character, hope. 5 And hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, who has been given to us. [4]

The final takeaway from this passage is how Jesus is overturning the traditions (and exclusions) about worship. The woman was upset about how the Jews thought the Temple in Jerusalem was the only place you could really worship God. In fact, it seems like she’s trying to use that to get out of talking about her marital history. But Jesus assures her that a new way of worship has arrived. The place no longer matters; what matters is expressing her true feelings and emotions from her heart, soul, and mind to praise God for all he’s done for her. It’s that joy that causes her to leave her water jars behind and hurry back to her people proclaiming, “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Could this be the Messiah?”[5]

John notes that the woman at the well was responsible, by virtue of her testimony, for many in her town believing, and they had that testimony confirmed by Jesus himself, because he stayed there a few days preaching and teaching. They knew the joy of personal justification and reconciliation with God. They also found the hope of eternal life as well. Listen to Romans 5:9–11:

9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.[6]

My prayer for you this Lenten and Easter season is that you know the salvation of God and receive it with joy just as the woman at the well did. Let us hold fast to our faith and hope and continue to reach out to those who need to experience God’s love, forgiveness, compassion and grace. Amen.

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

December 21, 2022

“Rachel Weeping”: The Objectification of Gender and Children

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,Exodus,Faith, Faithfulness,Genesis,Jeremiah,Prophet,Repentance,Romans,Soteriology,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 7:24 am
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Related Articles:

μαλακός (malakos) “soft,” “weak,” “effeminate”: A Look at Classical and Biblical Greek Usage

#ToxicMasculinity: Walking Like an Egyptian Pharaoh

#ToxicMasculinity: Walking Like an Egyptian Pharaoh–2021 Update

Abstract: In this article, I’ll compare the ancient practice of “exposure” to the modern practice of abortion. Then I’ll take a look at two different forms of gender confusion and argue that they are gross misrepresentations and objectifications of children and women.

(NOTE: If you like this post, you may also like μαλακός (malakos) “soft,” “weak,” “effeminate”: A Look at Classical and Biblical Greek Usage.)

The Bible tells us of three major “deliverance” events that had broad-ranging impact on world history. The first was the flood in Noah’s time. God was sorry and “deeply troubled” that he had made man, so he decided to start over again with the one righteous family he could find. God showed no discrimination in that judgment: everyone, young and old, except for the eight people in Noah’s family, died in that flood.

The second was the deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt in the time of Moses. I will deal with that more below, but the point I want to make about this is that the birth of the deliverer was preceded by an edict against children. Pharaoh feared the Jews were becoming numerous enough to overthrow Egypt, so he ordered all male children drowned in the Nile. It was, in effect, a primitive and cruel attempt at population control.

The third major deliverance event was, of course, the coming of the Messiah. When the visit from the wise men spooked Herod about the birth of the Messiah, he ordered all male children under two years of age to be killed. So like pharaoh, he acted out of fear and self-preservation. This prompted Matthew to quote a prophecy from Jeremiah 31:15:

“A voice is heard in Ramah,

mourning and great weeping,

Rachel weeping for her children

and refusing to be comforted,

because they are no more.” [1]

In the prophecy, Rachel represents the nation of Israel, the northern kingdom, because Rachel’s grandsons (sons of Joseph—Ephraim and Manasseh) were the two largest tribes in that kingdom. Israel was weeping for its lost innocence.

When I see the outright abuse and evil foisted upon our most vulnerable population by powerful forces with a gruesome agenda, I must echo Rachel’s sentiment here. Is the current war on children, families, and gender the precursor to another deliverance event? Are we getting to the point again where “every inclination of the thoughts of the human heart [is] only evil all the time….[and] the Lord regret[s] that he had made human beings on the earth”?[2] Has the corruption reached the limits of God’s tolerance? How close are we to the end of this era and possibly to the second coming of Christ and the new creation?

I want to examine the three most egregious, in my mind, attacks on children, the family, and gender in modern society to make my point: abortion, genital mutilation of children, and transgenderism. My goal here is to strip away the politics and agendas that overshadow these things to both shut out dissent and “normalize” this behavior, and to take a look at it for what it really is. As Christians, if we believe these things are not only bad, but evil, we can, if we start taking a stand and pushing against the evil woke, progressive mob, recover our culture and restore righteousness to the earth. I hope and pray this article will give you courage and strength to make that stand.

Abortion

“Exposure”: The Precursor to Abortion

[710] I will give you a pithy proof of this. An oracle came to Laius once—I will not say from Phoebus himself, but from his ministers—saying that he would suffer his doom at the hands of the child to be born to him and me. [715] And Laius—as, at least, the rumor goes—was murdered one day by foreign robbers at a place where the three highways meet. And the child’s birth was not yet three days past, when Laius pinned his ankles together* and had him thrown, by others’ hands, on a remote mountain.[3]

* fastened together by driving a pin through them, so as to maim the child and thus lessen the chance of its being reared if it survived exposure.[4]

The above passage from the English translation of Sophocles’s Oedipus Tyrannus (spoken by Iocasta, the mother of Laius’s exposed son) describes the ancient and often barbaric practice of “exposure.” In ancient times, if a child was unwanted, or in this case, feared because of some prophetic portent, parents or other elders would abandon the child in the wilderness to die alone, exposed to wild animals and the elements. Notice the eerie dispassionate tone she takes when speaking about the fate of her own child, a fate she seems wholly complicit in.

In the Bible, the practice is at least as old as Genesis 16, perhaps partially reflected in Sarai sending away Hagar and Ishmael. At least Sarai allowed the mother to care for the child (the angel of the Lord almost immediately restored them to Abram’s family unit). In Exodus 2, Moses is born to Levite parents under Pharaoh’s order to throw every male child into the Nile. Moses’s mother technically obeyed this command, but had put him in a papyrus basket, where he would be rescued by Pharaoh’s daughter and raised in Pharaoh’s court, with all the accompanying privileges.

The first chapter of Exodus doesn’t seem to indicate Pharaoh was concerned about any kind of prophecy, although pharaoh’s increased demands of their brick making were compelling the Israelites to cry out more to their God. Pharaoh’s fear of the Israelites was that they were becoming too numerous (Exodus 1:9), which prompted his fateful declaration. In other words, it was a form of population control imposed on an unwanted race of people. Kind of sounds like racism, right? Hitleresque? Legalized infanticide? Homicide of the innocent? Dare I say, “post-birth” or perinatal abortion?

Modern History of Abortion and Genocide

Let me preface this section by saying that I would not consider a medically necessary pregnancy termination to save the life of the mother an “abortion,” especially as that term is used today. If you’re terminating your pregnancy because it’s inconvenient or embarrassing for you, that’s the concept of abortion I’m writing about—the premeditated homicide of an infant prior to or around the time of birth with no indication of a medical emergency that threatens the life of health of the mother. If you’re terminating your pregnancy because your health or life is irreparably threatened, that’s not an “abortion” in my mind, and I’m not writing about those situations. If you’ve been in the dreadful situation of being a victim of rape or of a molestation or incest that resulted in pregnancy, I’m not writing about those situations, and it is not my place (nor anyone else’s) to pass judgment on women in those situations.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was an avowed eugenicist and racist. In her twisted mind, it was necessary to leave the procreating to those who had wealth and access. Abortion is just one method the Left promotes to control population under the guise of “women’s rights.” What is even more disturbing are the attempts of the radical Left to promote and glorify abortion. Can we really say a person is “normal” if they’re celebrating the opportunity to kill an innocent child in the womb? What kind of “empowerment” for women is unfettered access to abortion when what they and their abortion doctor are taking power over is a defenseless child in the womb? How did we get here as a culture?

What kind of “empowerment” for women is unfettered access to abortion when what they and their abortion doctor are taking power over is a defenseless child in the womb?

Abortion isn’t just about women’s rights, either. In fact, I would argue that the “antihuman” philosophy has taken over. They have no compassion for the life of the unborn or the mental and physical health of the mother. Their main goal is depopulating the earth. Why? Is it because they want to become some elite group to control all the resources? There’s your eugenics. There are certainly inequities in abortion, with women below the poverty level and women of color getting abortions at a higher rate.[5] So I think it’s fair to ask the question if abortion is being promoted among these demographic groups because of elitist or even racist attitudes.

I also think there’s merit to the idea that the Left just hates the idea of a loving, nuclear family, especially if a child is rescued from an abortion by a loving family. I refuse to believe any child is unwanted. What kind of monsters do these people think the human race is? The Left knows that every child rescued from an abortion by a loving family, regardless of their religious or political affiliation, is potentially a witness against their demand for unfettered abortion access.

All this brings me to my major point about abortion in line with the theme of this article: abortion objectifies the child in the womb. The child becomes an unwanted item when they’re deemed to be an “inconvenience.” The irony of this is that some of these women may have an “unintended” pregnancy because they themselves were objectified by an unscrupulous man who just used them for sex and split the scene. How does it solve a consequence of objectification by objectifying the consequence of objectification?

Gender Confusion

Reassignment or Mutilation?

I am not ashamed of the absolute truths of Scripture, and I hope that my Christ-following brothers and sisters share that boldness. It’s what we need in times like these. When God said “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness,” he was talking about individual human beings AND humanity as a collective whole. We, individually and together, reflect the glory and image of God’s creation, because we are the crowning piece of God’s creation. We were created to be stewards over God’s creation. Nothing else in God’s creation was given that status.

Genesis 1:27 speaks of our creation: “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.” “Mankind” is a singular noun in Hebrew, but it doesn’t necessarily refer to a person’s name. Here, it has the definite article associated with it, so it most likely refers to the human race, or humanity as a concept. The next two lines of the verse bear that out. The first “them” at the end of the second line is singular, and the first two lines are simply a chiasm to emphasize the point that God did the creating. The “them” at the end of the third line is plural, meaning that male and female are separate and the only two genders God created. And each has their own unique sex organs that differentiate based on the possible combinations of the sex genes. The sex organs are analogous: if they’re XX, you get ovaries, labia, and a clitoris; if they’re XY, you get testicles, a scrotum, and a penis.

The current trend of pushing kids—kids, mind you, under 10 years old in some cases—to get so-called “gender reassignment” surgery is absolutely disgusting. This is nothing more than genital mutilation akin to what we rightly condemn in other countries. These surgeries in many cases eliminate the possibility of reproduction because they remove the only sex organs they have. In other words, they’re removing the only phenotypical physical markers of gender and replacing them with a sham. I fail to understand how giving a transgender person parts that have limited functionality can help with gender dysphoria when the person knows their new parts aren’t really genuine. They can never fully realize the physical reality of being the gender they’re not born with.

Not only, then, is this push to get kids to question their gender rather than affirming the gender they were born with an objectification of children, making them pawns in a disturbing practice akin to surgical experimentation on children, it is also an objectification of gender, as if it’s something you can pick and choose or create your own variation thereof. Romans 1:26–27 says:

Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.[6]

Of course, this most likely refers to consenting adult males and females. But isn’t this exactly the evil we’re foisting on children? We have subjected innocent children to a practice that describes the wrath of God. See what you think about this passage if we put it in the context of what these radical cultural thugs are doing to kids with gender dysphoria:

Because of this, God gave the adults over to shameful abuses of power. Adults coerced the young girls to exchange future natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way, adults also coerced the young boys to also abandon future natural relations with women so they would be inflamed with lust for one another. These men and women committed shameful acts upon boys and girls, abused their power and the trust of the children, and should receive in themselves the due penalty for their error.[7]

Seems pretty harsh, doesn’t it? But when what they’re doing to these kids is essentially legalized child abuse, I think the rebuke should fit the crime. These people are perpetuating a cultural lie and have deceived or convinced many that such treatment of children should be normative. If you’re a parent and concerned about how this is impacting your children, or if others are influencing your children under the guise of “trusted adults,” you must be the ones to advocate for your children if you don’t want this happening to them. My purpose in writing this is not to offer counseling advice, especially since each situation would prevent its own unique set of circumstances.

Drag Queens: Objectifying and Degrading Women

As I was preparing to write this section, Tucker Carlson had a story about “A Drag Queen Christmas” show “for all ages.” Video from the performance shows scenes of what you might see in a strip joint. They have to blur out the (apparently) boxed, oversized “breasts” of a drag queen, and there’s a sketch about “Screwdolph the Red-Nippled Reindeer,” which features two men in reindeer costumes simulating sodomy. Some of the drag queens were interviewing kids(!!) in the front row of the show as young as nine years old! Why is it even legal to expose kids to this? This smacks of grooming through and through. A similar event called “Drag the Kids to Pride” happened in Austin and Dallas this past summer, where kids are encouraged to give tips to the drag dancers. Note the signage that’s hardly appropriate for kids.

Then there’s the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. They mock the chastity and poverty of true nuns by their very name, which is nothing more than hate speech against Catholic Christians and especially against Catholic nuns. Many of them paint their faces white. I’m just wondering how that’s any less racist than those who put on black face to mock or imitate black people? Drag is little more than normalized misogyny perpetuated by biological males against genetic females. It is toxic masculinity at the extremes. Why do so many people accept this? This is yet another example of objectifying gender, and especially objectifying women. The trouble is, under so-called diversity, inclusion, and equity, no one ever thinks to look at it for what it is because the wokaholic, “politically correct” (what an oxymoron!) crowd wants to defend their fringe behavior.

Drag is little more than normalized misogyny perpetuated by biological males against genetic females. It is toxic masculinity at the extremes.

Balancing Survival and Compassion

This is going to be hard to take for a lot of people. As Christians, we typically don’t fight by burning down cities, throwing frozen water bottles at the police, or tearing down statues and memorials. We have our words, and we have The Word. The antireligious bigots out there know that, which is why they’re trying so hard to alter the traditional understanding of language, redefine the traditional meaning of words, and hide or rewrite history. This is truly Orwellian. When I read 1984 last year, I could see just about everything that was happening in that forward-looking novel was and still is happening in our world today.

Jesus reserved his harshest words for those religious leaders who oppressed the people by abusing and misusing the cultural power they had as religious leaders. Jesus also treated harshly those who insulted the character of his Father in his Father’s own house by charging a fee to convert Roman coinage into Temple money. Jesus’s kindest and most compassionate words were for those who were oppressed or manipulated by the powerful. I realize there are many people who feel trapped and are doing what they think is best for themselves, not realizing they may be missing a better way or a higher calling because they can’t bring themselves to acknowledge God, or they have a distorted view of who God is and how and why he created the world and each of us to live in it and have dominion over it according to his plan.

My words in this article are intended for those “pharisees” who are arrogant enough to flaunt law and custom to impose a cultural fascism on the rest of us. My words are for those who have willingly “exchanged the truth of God for a lie” and “who freely strut about when what is vile is honored by the human race” (Psalm 12:8). If you’re one of the masses who have been caught up in this because it was popular or trendy or “enlightened,” and you’re just not sensing the satisfaction or peace you were promised, then I urge you to seek out a friendly church where you will be welcomed. As I said, Christians fight with words and ideas, because we know God’s Word never returns void. But we also extend love and compassion to all who desire to know the peace and security of a relationship with a living, loving, forgiving God.

My words and ideas are my own, supplemented with the sources I’ve documented herein.

Scott Stocking

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Genesis 6:5b–6. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Sophocles. 1887. The Oedipus Tyrannus of Sophocles. Edited with Introduction and Notes by Sir Richard Jebb. Lines 710–719. Edited by Sir Richard Jebb. Medford, MA: Cambridge University Press.

[4] Jebb, Richard C. n.d. Commentary on Sophocles: Oedipus Tyrannus (English). Line 718. Medford, MA: Perseus Digital Library.

[5] Dehlendorf C, Harris LH, Weitz TA. Disparities in abortion rates: a public health approach. Am J Public Health. 2013 Oct;103(10):1772-9. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2013.301339. Epub 2013 Aug 15. PMID: 23948010; PMCID: PMC3780732. Disparities in Abortion Rates: A Public Health Approach – PMC (nih.gov)

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] Romans 1:26–27. Modified for emphasis.

Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.