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: forgiveness, Isaiah 49:5-10, Jacob's well, John 4, Romans 5:1-11, woman at the well

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:

⁶You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. ⁷Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. ⁸But 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:

⁵And 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—

⁶he 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.

…

¹⁰They 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.

⁹The 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, ²through 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. ³Not only so, but we also glory in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; ⁴perseverance, character; and character, hope. ⁵And 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:

⁹Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! ¹⁰For 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! ¹¹Not 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.

Comments (3)

March 4, 2023

Life Lessons From a Year Through the Lectionary (Isaiah 58–61)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Birth Stories,Christology,Christology,Chronology,Ecclesiology,Isaiah,Life of Christ,Luke Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of,New Testament,Old Testament,Passion,Temptation — Scott Stocking @ 10:14 pm
Tags: Advent, Ash Wednesday, Epiphany, Isaiah 58-61, Lectionary, Lectionary reflections, Lent, Liturgical Calendar, Liturgical Calendar reflections, Social action

Background

I’m in the midst of a few weeks off from preaching, so I’ve had some time to reflect on the past 14 months of preaching through the Lectionary/Liturgical Calendar[1] at the behest of my childhood home church, Mt. View Presbyterian in Omaha. At the beginning of 2022, they had asked me to follow the Revised Common Lectionary, because that makes it easy for their small church to plan out bulletins and coordinate with other guest preachers.

It’s kind of like being back in seminary, having a different assignment due every two weeks or so, and because I’m not afraid of any challenge when it comes to preaching the Bible, I wholeheartedly agreed. I will admit as well that it’s beneficial to me, because I don’t have to think about topics in advance. Lincoln (IL) Christian Seminary taught me some great skills when it comes to hermeneutics (the science of interpretation) and homiletics (the skills for preaching), so I already know how to go through the motions to prepare.

Although I was raised in the Presbyterian faith and went through my church’s confirmation process, not much of that stuck as a sixth grader (or however old I was at the time). By the time I got to high school, I had begun to form my own ideas about my faith, and I started to look for something that was grounded more directly in Scripture and less reliant on the “traditions of men.” I found that home in the Restoration Movement (independent Christian Church) when I went to college.

The Restoration Movement traces its roots to the frontier Midwest (Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Ohio areas) where a group of preachers decided the best way to “do” church was to primarily stick to what the Bible said and not make manmade creeds or religious rules a test of faith or fidelity. “No creed but Christ; no book but the Bible”; “Where Scripture speaks, we speak; where they are silent there’s freedom” or “we’re silent.” Accordingly, things like the Liturgical Calendar or traditional Holy Days were downplayed, unless there was biblical precedent (e.g., the birth of Christ announced by angels). Historically, we’ve operated under the principle that the operations of God’s grace are not dictated by the Liturgical Calendar or any other calendar.

The operations of God’s grace are not dictated by the Liturgical Calendar or any other calendar.

While I still generally operate under that principle, I have come to discover the biblical underpinnings of many of the Holy Days or Seasons. In addition to that, I have come to see how important some of these traditions are to the Mt. View congregation as currently constituted. I have been refreshed and uplifted in my faith in God and my knowledge of his word by the work I’ve had to do to prepare messages based on the Lectionary readings for a particular Sunday. As such, I want to take the opportunity of this article to share what I’ve discovered about some of the lesser-known Holy Days and Seasons, at least among those in the Restoration Movement tradition, and perhaps encourage my brothers and sisters in the Restoration Movement to consider a more intentional approach to them.

Advent: Preparing for the Coming Messiah

As with most things, it’s best to start at the beginning, so I want to take a look at Advent first. The Lectionary cycles through three years (Years A, B, and C) of readings, and Advent marks the beginning of the new liturgical year.[2] As you might imagine, Advent is the most familiar to me. I have fond memories of getting the Advent calendars with chocolate or other goodies in them (maybe even a Bible verse?) and especially of lighting the Advent candles in church service with my family. I know our family got to do it at least one Advent Sunday when I was growing up.

What I had forgotten was that each Sunday in Advent had its own special theme. This may vary among the traditions, but the four common themes are usually Hope, Peace, Joy, and Love. For Advent 2022 (Year A of the new cycle), the OT passages focused on Isaiah.[3] What I find interesting is that many of these passages could have dual fulfillment, referring both to the first coming of the Messiah and the second coming of the Messiah. For example, Isaiah 2:3 (Year A, first Sunday) mentions going to the temple where God will teach his ways, while 2:4 speaks of beating swords into plowshares, which is typically associated with the second coming.

Isaiah 11:1–2 (second Sunday) speaks of Jesus as the one upon whom the Spirit of the Lord will rest, while 11:4 says “He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth.” Isaiah 35 (third Sunday) appears to reference much of Jesus’s healing ministry, but vs. 4 speaks God coming with vengeance. Isaiah 7:14 (fourth Sunday) is the prophecy Matthew quotes about the virgin birth of Christ, even though it has a partial fulfillment in the immediate chapters of Isaiah following that. Isaiah 9 (“For unto us a Child is born”) is the annual passage for Christmas Eve service.

It’s easy to see, then, why many of the Jews at the time of Jesus’s ministry were looking for a Messiah that would overthrow Roman rule. This led me to an important realization: God’s people have never lived in a time where they had no expectation of a coming Messiah, except perhaps for those who were close to the Messiah during his earthly ministry. Even though scholars are fairly certain that Jesus was not born in the month of December, the celebration of Advent along with Christmas not only as a retrospective on Jesus’s birth and first coming and all the heavenly fanfare that went along with that, but also as a prospective look at the second coming of Christ is still highly relevant to Christians today, especially in our current culture and climate.

God’s people have never lived in a time where they had no expectation of a coming Messiah.

Epiphany

I recently posted my Epiphany message, A Pastor’s Epiphany About Epiphany (Matthew 2:1–12; Isaiah 60:1–6; Psalm 72), so I won’t say too much about that here. The title pretty much sums it up. Epiphany focuses on the visit of the magi to Jesus, which, if you read the Gospel account closely, seems to come a few days after the birth of Christ (historically 12 days after, but there’s no biblical text to suggest that time frame); Jesus’s family was in a house by that time. Focusing on the Isaiah passage here, which is the same every year in the Lectionary, reveals some interesting clues to where the magi came from.

As I was preparing the Epiphany message, I realized that I’d never really heard anyone in the Restoration Movement talk about where these magi had come from. That seemed pretty odd to me given that we’re supposed to focus on examining the Scriptures to figure out the truth. I’d heard about David Longnecker’s Mystery of the Magi in a news report. The book gives a detailed analysis of where these magi may have lived and what their connection was to Jewish history and prophecy. As it turns out, these magi were probably not from Persia, because Persia was in decline at the time. Rather, they were probably from some diaspora Jews that never made it to Babylon and settled in communities east of the Jordan river and Dead Sea, and perhaps as far south as Midian. They were known as Nabateans. They would have had a more intimate knowledge of Messianic prophecy and seem to fit the demographic and economic descriptions in the Isaiah 60 passage, as I explain in my message. Isaiah 60:1 may refer to the star they followed; they were at the crossroads of several prominent trade routes; and “Nebaioth” is mentioned, which may well be the root of the name of the Nabateans.

If there’s any application to this knowledge, I think it’s that we need to learn to recognize the signs of the times to anticipate the second coming of Christ, which ties in to the secondary theme of Advent. The Nabateans appear to have been diligently searching the skies and paying attention to the signs, because they did not want to miss the coming of the Messiah they had hoped for as well.

“Jesus would probably laugh at us for giving up things like chocolate, beer, coffee…all the things that actually bring us joy and make us happy.”

Lent

In the past couple weeks since Lent began, I’ve had one friend ask whether I observe Ash Wednesday, and another ask me what I thought about a Facebook post about one person’s unique take on Lent. Here’s a quote cited in the post from a priest he’d heard:

“Jesus would probably laugh at us for giving up things like chocolate, beer, coffee…all the things that actually bring us joy and make us happy.

What He might suggest is giving up the things that make us miserable in God’s Paradise.

Things like self doubt, insecurities, jealousy, greed, and gossip and anger.

The things that move us away from The Light.

Honor His sacrifice by giving up The Darkness in your Life.”

Now I’ve never given up anything for Lent, because I don’t observe it. And I’ve never had ashes placed on my forehead to initiate a Lenten fast. But I thought what this priest he’s quoting said made a lot of sense. But here’s where my initial principle comes into play: the operation of God’s grace isn’t limited to a calendar or a season. Shouldn’t we always be giving up the darkness in our lives so we can more fully know God? That’s a good way to live to be sure, and I commend anyone who can do that, but if it’s something we should give up permanently, then is it really a fast? Is it really a sacrifice to give up something that’s bad for us?

Before I even looked at the Lectionary for what passage is assigned for Lent, I knew Isaiah 58 was really the best definition of fasting we have in the Bible. As it turns out, that is the evergreen passage for Lent. The problem as I see it with concept of Lent as a personal fast is that it is somewhat self-centered. Sure, the presumed motivation is to get closer to God, but how does giving up a food item or certain activity actually accomplish that? And again, if it’s something that you know is bad for you anyway, why do you need the backdrop of a religious Holy Season to accomplish it?

If we look at Isaiah’s description of fasting, though, there’s really nothing selfish about how it should be. There’s no talk of personal sacrifice or personal wellbeing. In fact, Isaiah (58:5) scolds his readers for thinking of fasting in just such a way:

⁵ Is this the kind of fast I have chosen,

only a day for people to humble themselves?

Is it only for bowing one’s head like a reed

and for lying in sackcloth and ashes?

Is that what you call a fast,

a day acceptable to the Lord?^[4]

Isaiah then goes on to describe what the Lord expects from our fasting, and there’s nothing selfish about it, except that when we do the hard things, then we have a reward waiting for us. What are the hard things (vv. 6–7, 9b–10a)?

Loose the chains of injustice
Untie the cords of the yoke
Set the oppressed free and satisfy their needs
Break every yoke
Share your food with the hungry by spending yourself on their behalf
Provide the poor wanderer with shelter
Clothe the naked
Not turn away from our own flesh and blood
Do away with the blame game and malicious talk

What are the resulting rewards? They’re commensurate with the degree to which we work toward accomplishing the hard stuff! This isn’t legalism, though. This is what it means to show our faith by what we do, not just by what we say. We talk the talk AND walk the walk. Integrity.

Your light will break forth like the dawn
Your healing will appear quickly
Your righteousness will go before you
The glory of the LORD will be your rear guard
You will call, and the LORD will answer
You will cry for help, and he will be there for you
Your light will rise in the darkness, like the noonday sun
The LORD will always guide you, satisfy you, and strengthen you.

And so on and so on and so on.

In the Old Testament, most references to fasting are about a community fasting, not individuals. When it occurs in the books of pre-exilic history, it often refers to a prebattle ritual. David fasted for his first child with Bathsheba, but to no avail. In the post-exilic history, fasting is mentioned in connection with restoring Jerusalem to a semblance of its pre-exilic state (e.g., compare Isaiah 58:12 to Isaiah 61:4). In the New Testament, most references to fasting are about what to do when you fast. There’s very little mention of its purpose, although the reference to John’s disciples fasting most likely indicates they were waiting for the Messiah.

In the Old Testament, most references to fasting are about a community fasting, not individuals.

Above, I made a parenthetical reference to Isaiah 61 with respect to rebuilding ancient ruins. Nehemiah fasted before taking on the project to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem. But do you know what else is significant about Isaiah 61? That is the passage Jesus uses for his own ministry in Luke’s account, immediately after Jesus spends 40 days fasting in the wilderness. His words sound very much like the purpose of fasting in Isaiah 58. Jesus fasted for 40 days in the wilderness because he knew he had big things, Isaiah 58 big things, to accomplish in his ministry, so he did it right. Check out Isaiah 61:1–3a and see if that doesn’t sound a lot like Isaiah 58:

The Spirit of the Sovereign Lord is on me,

because the Lord has anointed me

to proclaim good news to the poor.

He has sent me to bind up the brokenhearted,

to proclaim freedom for the captives

and release from darkness for the prisoners,

²to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor

and the day of vengeance of our God,

to comfort all who mourn,

³ and provide for those who grieve in Zion—

to bestow on them a crown of beauty instead of ashes,

the oil of joy instead of mourning,

and a garment of praise instead of a spirit of despair.^[5]

So fasting is for the big things; the big decisions. The Gospels do hint that fasting had taken on a more individual application in some cases, but I don’t think its purpose, as outlined in Isaiah 58, was ever diminished. Jesus set the standard for fasting. Another interesting aspect of fasting in the NT: it’s never mentioned after Acts, and only twice in Acts 13:2–3 around a decision about whom to send out to the Gentiles.

The application for the modern church seems clear, then. While there does seem to be something to be gained by fasting personally, the more important goal the Scriptures (and Jesus) have in fasting is justice, especially for the poor and oppressed. The Scriptures also seem clear, both in the OT and especially with John’s disciples in the NT, that corporate fasting is much more powerful and effective in God’s kingdom economy.

Conclusion (for now)

This post is already pretty long, so I’ll forego discussing Easter through Passover, which makes up the last of the Holy Seasons in the Liturgical Calendar. The rest of the Sundays in the Liturgical Calendar after Passover are identified as “Propers,” 29 of them for the remainder of 2023. That seems kind of unusual to me to have the major church Holy Days packed into five months of the year. Do we need 22 weeks a year to get ready for the other 30 weeks? Is the liturgical year intended to be a microcosm of the Christian life: we educate ourselves about who Christ is and what he’s done for us early on so that we can walk faithfully for the rest of our lives?

I’d love to hear your stories about how these Holy Days or Holy Seasons have impacted you. As I said before, I’d never really given them much thought until this last year, so I’ve tried to look at them from an outsider’s perspective, since I have little to no historical experience with these things. I do hope my brothers and sisters in the Restoration Movement will consider my words here and how they can present these Holy Days and Seasons in a fresh new way to reach those who may have lost their way for whatever reasons. I think the body of Christ will benefit greatly if we can discover a new appreciation for the Liturgical Calendar.

My opinions are my own.

Scott Stocking

[1] The Liturgical Calendar is the order of the Holy Days and Seasons. The Lectionary represents the assigned Scripture texts for each day that are used in the worship service or as the basis for the message on any given day of the Liturgical Calendar. My focus here is primarily on those events that happen on Sundays.

[2] The new liturgical year formally begins on the Thursday before the first Sunday in Advent. This is usually the last Thursday of November, so this is typically Thanksgiving Day, unless November has five Thursdays.

[3] For some Holy Days, the passages are different from year to year in the cycle, but are the same in the respective years of each cycle. So year A has the same passages for Advent in 2019, 2022, 2025, etc.; Year B for 2020, 2023, 2026, etc.. For other Holy Days, Epiphany and Lent, for example, the passages are the same for all three years in the cycle and thus across all cycles.

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

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

Comments (3)

February 27, 2023

A Pastor’s Epiphany About Epiphany (Matthew 2:1–12; Isaiah 60:1–6; Psalm 72)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Birth Stories,Christology,Ecclesiology,Isaiah,Liturgical Calendar,Matthew Gospel of,Psalms,Theophany — Scott Stocking @ 5:56 pm
Tags: Epiphany, Frankincense, Gold, Holy Days, Isaiah 60:1-6, Magi, Matthew 2:1-12, Myrrh, Nabateans, Psalm 72, Wise Men

Click Play above to hear the message.

I preached this message on January 8, 2023, the first Sunday after Epiphany (January 6), at Mt. View Presbyterian Church in Omaha. As I say in my message, I had never really given much thought to this “Holy Day,” because the brotherhood I’m associated with today doesn’t typically do anything special with any Holy Days except Christmas and Easter. There may be a divine component as to why I’m posting this almost two months after preaching the message. I was recently drawn into a couple conversations on Lent and Ash Wednesday by friends who are from a Catholic and another mainline Protestant tradition, respectively, and together, the Holy Spirit has been using these experiences to prompt me to take a fresh look at these Holy Days that I had dismissed out-of-hand as traditions of man. Look for another blog post soon on what my thought process has been in that regard. The message is lightly edited for publication.

Historical Background

Epiphany. As English words go, it’s kind of a funny sounding word, don’t you think? When I hear that “piff” sound in the word, it reminds me of the sound I make when I think something is too easy for me. For those outside of mainline denominations, if they know the word at all, it probably doesn’t have any sort of religious or Christian meaning for them: when someone says, “I had an epiphany,” they’re not talking about a cheeseburger from Dinker’s, although that could be a close comparison for burger lovers. Anybody hungry now? In that sense of the word, an epiphany moment is when you see the light, discover your purpose, or understand clearly what action you must take to set your life on a better and more prosperous path.

But for those of us in the Western church, the “Epiphany,” theeeee “Epiphany” is not just some moment you have internally, but it’s a series of events surrounding one person, Jesus Christ, that has impact on the whole human race eternally. It is the short period of time surrounding the birth of Jesus where not only is he revealed as God’s Messiah to the shepherds in the fields, but also to the Magi from the East, wherever that may have been. Now when we were kids and did the Christmas nativity scene in the front of the sanctuary, the Magi were always there with the shepherds. Did you notice in Matthew’s text where the Magi encountered Jesus: it wasn’t in the manger; it was in a house! More on that later. First, I want to look a little bit at the word itself.

Now as I’ve grown and matured as a Christian and a preacher, I’ve come to adopt the view that I should call Bible things by Bible names, where practical, so that when I talk about something biblical, I can point to the Bible and say: “Here it is.” But sometimes we use words that aren’t in the Bible, at least, not in our English translations, to summarize biblical concepts. “Trinity” is one of those words that isn’t in the Bible, but the Bible is pretty clear about the triune relationship among the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Word Study on ἐπιφαίνω (epiphainō)

Similarly, the word “Epiphany” is not found in the text of our English translations, but the word is simply borrowed from a family of words we have in the Greek version of the Old Testament and the Greek New Testament. It is an intensified form of a word that means “appear” or “make known.” Half of its uses in the OT Greek text are found in the phrase “make your face shine upon us” (Numbers 6:25 and several passages in the Psalms), and a few other uses refer to God revealing himself to someone.

In the NT, the noun is used 5 times in 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus to refer to either the first or second “appearing” of the Savior. The verb is used by Zechariah in his song of praise in Luke 1 to refer to Mary’s child as “the rising sun [who] will come to us from heaven to shine on those living in darkness.” It’s also used twice in Titus to refer to “the grace of God” and “the kindness and love of God our Savior” appearing.

Now the thing that makes this an “intensified” word, that is, to use the Greek, an EPIphainō and not just a phainō, is the nature of what was revealed. This is where the Magi come in. Historically, according to the Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, the term was first used of a church feast on January 6 in the Eastern church in the third century, and originally focused on the baptism of Jesus, where the Holy Spirit descended like a dove on him and God said, “This is my beloved Son, with him I am well pleased.” To this day, the Eastern Orthodox church still focuses on the baptism of Christ on Epiphany. However, when the Western church adopted the Holy Day, they switched the focus to the visit of the Magi, whose gifts revealed that Jesus was the Son of God, the expected heir of David’s throne, the Messiah. It wasn’t until the 20^th century that the Western (i.e., Roman Catholic) church separated out the celebration of the baptism of Christ to the first Sunday after Epiphany, which happens to be today according to the Lectionary we follow here!

Background of the Magi

So who were these Magi and where did they come from? Why did they have such a profound interest in identifying “his star” and following it to find the king? How would they even know about such a star? Was it prophesied somewhere, or was it just some oral tradition that had circulated through the Middle East for centuries?

As it turns out, there are a couple prophecies from the Old Testament that seem to refer to the star, the Magi or kings who would bring gifts, and where they come from. The two OT passages identified every year in the lectionary for January 6, Epiphany, are Isaiah 60 and Psalm 72, the latter of which we already read this morning. We’ll come back to those in a moment. Traditionally, for hundreds of years, we’ve believed that these Magi from the East came from Persia, the region of modern-day Iran and Iraq. It’s true that Magi, or wise men, were well respected and wielded a great deal of political power in their heyday, especially as we see in the book of Daniel.

But in the excellent book called Mystery of the Magi by Dwight Longenecker, the author pulls together the history of the Persian Magi from several sources and shows that, by the time of Jesus’s birth, these Magi had lost most of their political power and influence after Alexander the Great conquered their territory and up through the time the Parthians had wrested control from Alexander’s successors. At the time of Christ’s birth, then, the Persian magi had become marginalized to the point of near exile and poverty, and their political ties to the Roman Empire were on such shaky ground that they would not have had the resources or the political influence to make such a trip to see the newborn king, let alone bring gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

Enter the Nabateans. The Nabateans were an up-and-coming nation that inhabited the territory east of the Jordan River, from as far north as Damascus and as far south as the Arabian peninsula, including Midian and perhaps even modern-day Yemen. One of their most prominent cities was Petra, you know, that city with “Treasury” carved out of the side of a cliff. They had begun to come into prominence after the Jews were exiled to Babylon. In fact, many of the Jews who were exiled probably never made it to Babylon, because according to historians, there were several Jewish colonies scattered throughout the region the Nabateans controlled, and several made their way to these colonies instead. These exiles most likely included priests who would have brought with them the knowledge of the prophets, psalms, and Torah to lead their brethren in worship.

By the time of Jesus’s birth, the Nabateans controlled many of the trade routes between Persia and the Mediterranean. As such, they had wealth and access to abundant supplies of gold, frankincense, and myrrh, not to mention some pretty slick technology to capture and provide water for their survival in the desert regions where they lived. Longenecker believes these Magi came from Nabatea, and they would have had a deep understanding of Jewish prophecies, because they had strong ancestral ties to the Jews and strong religious ties to the Temple.

Prophetic Background for Epiphany

Having laid out this background, then, I want us to look first at Isaiah 60 to see why they mention following a star to find the Messiah. Listen to verses 1 through 3:

“Arise, shine, for your light has come,

and the glory of the Lord rises upon you.

²See, darkness covers the earth

and thick darkness is over the peoples,

but the Lord rises upon you

and his glory appears over you.

³Nations will come to your light,

and kings to the brightness of your dawn. ^[1]

Doesn’t that sound kind of like a star rising? And what about “his glory appears over you”? Kind of sounds like Matthew’s description of the Magi coming to where the star “stopped over the place where the child was.” Where was this place? According to Isaiah 60:14, it is “the City of the Lord, Zion of the Holy One of Israel.” Where were Mary, Joseph, and Jesus? Well according to Matthew, by the time the Magi found him, they were in a house, not a stable. It’s not clear whether they were still in Bethlehem and where the star was in relation to Bethlehem and Jerusalem, but the context seems to suggest they were in or close to Bethlehem, because the area around Bethlehem was where Herod had the children under 2 killed. As such, I think it’s a fair assumption that this is at least the primary prophecy these Nabatean Magi had in mind. But let’s look a little further to be sure (vv. 4–5).

⁴“Lift up your eyes and look about you:

All assemble and come to you;

your sons come from afar,

and your daughters are carried on the hip.

⁵Then you will look and be radiant,

your heart will throb and swell with joy;

the wealth on the seas will be brought to you,

to you the riches of the nations will come. ^[2]

In Matthew’s story, we don’t have a count of how many Magi came to see Jesus. Again, tradition tries to fill in the gap by assigning one Magus to each gift. We know a bunch of shepherds had come to see baby Jesus in the manger, at the prompting of a “heavenly host” that hovered over them. If the Nabatean Magi thought this was such an important event, wouldn’t more than three of them have come? This would have been a pretty big deal for all of them! Add to that the Nabateans’ profitable trade industry, and you can see the connection to the “wealth on the seas” and the “riches of the nations” that could be brought to Israel.

Finally, vs. 6 names several cities that would have been in Nabatea, and vs. 7 mentions “the rams of Nebaioth.” Because the Nabateans do not have any surviving written documents we’re aware of, some have speculated that “Nebaioth” is actually the kingdom of the Nabateans. Verse 6 even mentions that “All those from Sheba shall come. They shall bring gold and frankincense.”^[3] At the time, the only source of frankincense known was in Sheba in southern Arabia and Somaliland in Africa.

So it seems pretty clear that Isaiah 60 was in fact one of the prophecies these Magi looked forward to, not just because it predicted the coming of the Messiah, but because the Nabateans recognized that they had a role to fulfill in that prophecy.

Psalm 72 sounds quite a bit like Isaiah 61, the prophecy Jesus read about himself the first time we see him speaking in the synagogue, especially the parts about defending the afflicted, crushing the oppressor, delivering the needy, and rescuing the poor from oppression and violence. Note that vs. 10 also mentions Sheba twice in reference to bringing gifts and gold “kings of Sheba and Seba bring gifts.” Given all this, it seems highly likely to me that these Magi were important rulers among the Nabateans, both religious and political, and that they had an intimate and rich connection to Jewish religion, culture, and ancestry.

What Epiphany Means for Us

So this is a lot of information here this morning, but what does it mean for us today? The gifts brought by the Magi were not randomly chosen. As we saw in the Isaiah and Psalms passages, they were “planned” long before Christ was born, and these Magi knew that. Gold was brought as a tribute to a king. Today, of course, many of us give of our resources to the church or other organizations that help the needy. We use that money to share the good news of Jesus and the gospel with those who need hope. It reminds me of the parable of the hidden treasure in Matthew 13:44: When the man found the treasure, he sold all that he had to buy the field it was in. The gift of gold is an easy one to figure out for us. My guess is, Mary and Joseph may have used some of that gold when they had to flee to Egypt to provide for their own needs in that short exile.

The gift of frankincense applies to us at a deeper level, the level of the heart. Frankincense was used in the worship ceremonies in the Tabernacle in the wilderness and in the temple in Jerusalem. The rarity of frankincense, along with its pleasing aroma, is what makes it valuable. I think it’s a fair jump, then, to suggest that it can also represent our own individual uniqueness in what we ourselves have to offer to God in worship. Worship is not just a ceremony or a ritual we perform on a regular basis. Worship comes from the root word “worth,” and we show we consider Christ worthy by offering the whole of our uniqueness to him and his service. Perhaps the apostle Paul had this in mind when he wrote in 2 Corinthians 2:14–15: “But thanks be to God, who always leads us as captives in Christ’s triumphal procession and uses us to spread the aroma of the knowledge of him everywhere. For we are to God the pleasing aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing.^[4]”

Finally, myrrh was used in part to ease severe pain, and also to prepare the body for the grave in that day. On the cross, Jesus was also offered wine mixed with myrrh, but according to Mark’s gospel, he refused it. Myrrh, then, can remind us that each of us must make ourselves ready for that day when we meet our Savior face to face in heaven, and are welcomed into our eternal home.

It occurs to me that Epiphany, then, is really a microcosm of the whole Christian experience. We celebrate the birth and revealing of Jesus as the Messiah, the dedication of our lives to him in worship, and the hope of eternal life that he purchased for us in his death and resurrection. And I have to say, preparing this message has been an “epiphany” for me. As a kid growing up in this church, I never thought much about Epiphany. I guess I was still too pumped up on the adrenaline I got from all my Christmas gifts to concern myself with the gifts presented to Jesus. As an adult, I never forgot my Presbyterian roots, but I had found a spiritual home among a brotherhood that had its own roots in Scottish Presbyterianism, but who didn’t have a separate recognition of this tradition—it was all wrapped up with Christmas. I never had a class in seminary about the traditions and what they signified in the “mainline” denominations.

So once again, I’ll say thank you for allowing me to share with you, and thank you for asking that I follow the Lectionary. I hope and pray our time together this morning has been as enlightening to you as it has been for me this week. Peace to you all. Amen.

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

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

^[3] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. 2016. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles.

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

Comments (1)

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: Abortion, Exodus 1:9, Exposure, Face-paint racism, Gender transition in kids, Genital mutilation, Jeremiah 31:15, Objectification of children, Objectification of women, Oedipus Tyrannus, Romans 1:26-27

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?

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?

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 crowing 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. 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.

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.

October 3, 2022

Strength From (and for) Our Suffering: Paul’s Commissioning of Timothy (2 Timothy 1:1–14)

Filed under: 1 Timothy,2 Timothy,Biblical Studies,Courage,Ecclesiology,Faith, Faithfulness,Romans — Scott Stocking @ 10:22 pm
Tags: Apostleship, Family of Faith, Ordination, Paul and Timothy, Preaching, Psalm 37, Timothy

I preached this sermon October 2, 2022, at Peace Presbyterian Church in Omaha, NE. I forgot to bring my voice recorder, so unfortunately, I do not have an audio file for it. Peace Presbyterian opened in 1989 when the Presbytery closed down the Waterloo Presbyterian Church and my uncle, Kenneth Bunnell, Jr., moved from the pulpit there to Peace.

“Shrinking back” is the opposite of “faithfulness.”

I think most of us have had someone near and dear to us in our lives that wasn’t a blood relative. For some of us, it was someone we looked up to who was “cool” in their own way, and maybe even one who, although we couldn’t admit it out loud, we wanted as that third “parent” or our safety net when we thought our own parents didn’t understand us.

For others, maybe you were that cool one or caring one who latched on to a kid or young adult who truly needed a better environment or solid guidance and direction to get or keep their life on a good path. And when they succeeded, your heart filled with pride just as if they were your own child.

We see in the New Testament just such a relationship between the Apostle Paul and a young disciple named Timothy, and we can trace the evolution of their relationship throughout Paul’s letters. We first meet the “disciple” Timothy in Acts 16:1, in the town of Lystra, on Paul’s second missionary journey. A few chapters later, Luke calls Timothy and Erastus Paul’s “helpers.” It would seem Timothy had a strong desire help Paul spread the gospel across Asia Minor.

As we progress through Paul’s letters, we begin to see Paul’s descriptions of Timothy becoming more personal and familial: In Romans 16:21, “Timothy, my coworker”; in 1 Corinthians 4:17, “Timothy, my son whom I love, who is faithful in the Lord”; in 2 Corinthians 1:1 and Colossians 1:1, “Timothy our brother.” In Philippians, it seems Timothy has “risen” to equal status with Paul: “Servants of Jesus Christ.”

And when we come to the letters addressed to Timothy in the New Testament, we see the depth of Paul’s love for Timothy: “My true son in the faith”; “My dear son.” The two letters to Timothy are the first of only four letters Paul wrote to an individual instead of to a church. If it was even possible then, Timothy seems to have a risen to the status of an “Apostle-come-lately” just as Paul was. Paul’s letters to Timothy, then, are guidance on how to raise up men and women who could lead in the local church. Let’s listen to the first part of 2 Timothy chapter 1 and see how Paul speaks to Timothy in the historical context, and how that applies to those of us who lead and serve in the church in the modern context.

Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, in keeping with the promise of life that is in Christ Jesus, ²To Timothy, my dear son: Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord.

³I thank God, whom I serve, as my ancestors did, with a clear conscience, as night and day I constantly remember you in my prayers. ⁴Recalling your tears, I long to see you, so that I may be filled with joy. ⁵I am reminded of your sincere faith, which first lived in your grandmother Lois and in your mother Eunice and, I am persuaded, now lives in you also.

⁶For this reason I remind you to fan into flame the gift of God, which is in you through the laying on of my hands. ⁷For the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love and self-discipline. ⁸So do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me his prisoner. Rather, join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God. ⁹He has saved us and called us to a holy life—not because of anything we have done but because of his own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time, ¹⁰but it has now been revealed through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. ¹¹And of this gospel I was appointed a herald and an apostle and a teacher. ¹²That is why I am suffering as I am. Yet this is no cause for shame, because I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him until that day.

¹³What you heard from me, keep as the pattern of sound teaching, with faith and love in Christ Jesus. ¹⁴Guard the good deposit that was entrusted to you—guard it with the help of the Holy Spirit who lives in us.^[1]

Paul is not just making a passing reference to the influence of his ancestors on his faith and service in verse 3; he mentions them as a comparison to the faith Timothy’s mother Eunice, who was a Jew, and her mother (presumably) Lois had and how they had passed that faith down to Timothy. In verse 4, Paul also seems to allude here to his tearful farewell meeting with the Ephesian elders in Miletus, as we read about in Acts 20. He knew suffering and prison awaited him in the future as he returns to Jerusalem, but he was set on pressing forward nonetheless.

In verse 6, Paul sets the tone for the encouragement he is offering Timothy by first reminding Timothy of his own ordination, a confirmation of his calling: “Fan into flame the gift of God!” It would seem after the personal instructions and teaching of the first letter, Paul is now commissioning Timothy to prepare him for his first located ministry. We know from 1 Timothy that Paul had appointed him to preach in Ephesus, perhaps one of the largest group of believers in Asia Minor. Timothy is apparently coming to the church on the heels of Paul’s 2+ years of ministry in Ephesus, perhaps just before he’s arrested if we can assume that from v. 8, so it would have been a daunting task for anyone to step into those shoes.

That’s why in vs. 7, Paul reminds Timothy that the Holy Spirit dwelling in us “does not make us timid, but gives us power, love, and self-discipline.” Timothy may realize that he could face the same fate as Paul in being arrested (and indeed, we learn from the end of Hebrews that he had in fact been in prison), but Paul knows the only way to put forth a convincing gospel presentation about life in the hereafter is to proclaim it with and in the power and authority of the Holy Spirit. The message of the gospel must stand in contrast to the spiritual darkness of the world around them, full of light and truth. Otherwise, what would be the attraction of the gospel?

Also note in vs. 7 that, even though Paul is addressing Timothy personally in the whole letter, the promise of the power of the Spirit of God is not just for Timothy. When Paul speaks of “us” here, he’s not using the royal “we.” At the very least, Paul is may be referring back to his ancestors and Timothy’s mother and grandmother whom he mentioned in his opening; it’s even more likely that he is including all believers everywhere. You only need to flip back a few pages into 1 Timothy to see this is the case, where he not only gives basic instructions for praying men, modestly-dress women, and lonely widows in chapters 2 and 6 (all of which indicate some sort of submission or humility before Christ, so there’s no sexism there), but also instructions in 1 Timothy 3 for the character qualities of overseers, deacons, and women who were leading in the local church at that time.

In verse 8, Paul puts some meat on the bone as to what it means to be timid by exhorting Timothy to “not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me his prisoner.” Paul is speaking here of his own “testimony,” (in the language of the New Testament, the same word from which we get the English word “martyr”), that got him thrown into prison. That testimony was not just the words Paul spoke about the gospel, but the life he lived for the gospel. It involved his whole self, mind, body, and soul, or as Paul puts it in verse 11: “herald, apostle, and teacher.” Paul then makes Timothy an offer some might not be willing to take: “You’re living in God’s power now, so go ahead and join me in my own suffering.”

Now verse 8 here sounds much like Romans 1:16–17:

¹⁶For 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. ¹⁷For 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.”^[2]

The gospel of Christ is powerful to bring salvation. But what gives the gospel, the “good news” of Christ, its power? It’s powerful because it was perfectly lived out by God’s own son, Jesus Christ. That’s the crux of the argument Paul lays out in the first 8 chapters of Romans: Jesus did not break the law of God, so he was the only one to earn the designation “righteous.” Look at the last phrase in Romans 1:17: “The righteous will live by faith.” The Hebrew of Habakkuk 2:4, from which Paul quotes this verse, is a bit more nuanced: “The righteous person will live by his faithfulness.” It’s not clear why the NT translator didn’t follow the OT translation here, but do you see the implications here? If, as Paul says in Romans 3, “There is no one righteous, not even one,” then who is the righteous one who lives by faithfulness in Romans 1:17? That could only be Jesus, right? The author of Hebrews puts it this way: “But my righteous one will live by faith. And I take no pleasure in the one who shrinks back. But we do not belong to those who shrink back and are destroyed, but to those who have faith and are saved.”

So we see more clearly now the urgent reason why Paul is so strongly exhorting Timothy here: Being timid about the Gospel; being ashamed of the Gospel; fretting about the suffering for the gospel that is difficult for sure, but for most, nothing like what Jesus himself went through, is “shrinking back” according to the author of Hebrews. “Shrinking back” is the opposite of “faithfulness.”

Getting back to the 2 Timothy passage, Paul tells us in vs. 10 that Jesus’s life and crucifixion worked to “destroy death” and to bring “life and immortality to light through the gospel.” As the perfect lamb of God, Jesus’s own physical body was “destroyed” on the cross so that in his death and resurrection, he could destroy death and its power forever! As believers, we have been made alive in Christ. Our eternal life doesn’t begin when we die. Our eternal life has already begun in Christ.

In 2 Timothy 1:12, Paul again reminds Timothy that suffering for the gospel is no cause for shame. As Jesus said, we only need faith the size of a mustard seed to move mountains. Taking that first step of faith, planting that mustard seed, if you will, can be difficult. But once we start down that road of faithfulness to what he’s called us to, it becomes difficult to turn back. We may feel unworthy like the servants in the Luke passage we read, but we have a sure hope that our own faithfulness will be rewarded. Like Paul, we can have assurance that God is with us along the way. I love the last part of vs. 12 here: “I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that he is able to guard what I have entrusted to him until that day.”

Paul closes out his charge to Timothy by calling on him to keep the faith and do his part to “guard the good deposit…with the help of the Holy Spirit.” This hearkens back to Deuteronomy, where the Lord, through Moses, repeats the refrain throughout the book to “be careful to obey what I’ve commanded. Obedience and faithfulness are not accidents. They are intentional choices we make to step toward and into the will of God.

What are some practical ways we can guard the good deposit? That’s where Psalm 37 comes in, the one we read earlier in the service. It involves both “dos” and “don’ts.”

Trust in the Lord (2x)	Do not fret (3x)
Dwell in the land	Do not be envious
Do good	Refrain from anger
Commit your way to the Lord	Turn from wrath
Take delight in the Lord	Turn away from godless chatter (1 Timothy 6:20)
Be still	Turn away from the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge (1 Timothy 6:20)
Wait patiently

Most of us have heard the phrase, “Let’s get ready to rumble.” Michael Buffer, the famous professional ring announcer for boxing matches, coined and trademarked the phrase to kick off boxing matches. As Christians, we face a “rumble” of our own when it comes to the world. Even in Timothy’s day, he needed the encouragement of his mentor and coworker Paul to not get discouraged in the face of the spiritual battles they faced with respect to persecution. This is why it is so important to hold onto the fellowship we have with one another. As Paul did for Timothy, we can encourage each other and draw strength from one another when the rumble comes our way. The scriptures we looked at this morning lay out a strategy for us to stand strong and keep the faith. Let’s go from here and advance the kingdom in the power of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

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

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

August 7, 2022

Saved by the Bris: Colossians 2 and the “Circumcision of Christ”

Filed under: Christology,Circumcision,Colossians,Diagrams,Ecclesiology,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 11:38 am
Tags: Chiastic structure, Circumcision of Christ

Listen to “Saved by the Bris”

Sermon preached at Mt. View Presbyterian Church, July 24, 2022. Lightly edited for publication.

I want to pose a question to you as I begin this morning, and I promise I will help you realize the answer by the time I’m done about 25 minutes from now. Here’s the question: What is “the circumcision of Christ”? The follow-up question to that is: “How does it save us?” Intrigued? Good. Let’s dive into Colossians chapter 2.

Colossae was a diminishing river town along a major trade route in what is now southern Turkey between Ephesus on the west coast and the Euphrates River in the east. Its close neighbors, Laodicea and Hierapolis had long before New Testament times overtaken it in prominence and prosperity. But that didn’t stop Epaphras, a convert from Paul’s two-and-a-half-year ministry in Ephesus, from founding a successful congregation there in the mid first century.

At some point early in the life of that congregation, they came under the attack or influence of some heretical teaching. It’s not really clear what exactly the nature of that teaching was, but we can glean some ideas based on the themes Paul addresses in the letter. Most likely, the primary challenge to the Christian faith that was emerging at that time, Gnosticism, was that threat. Gnosticism says that anything done in the flesh is evil, therefore, nothing we do really matters for eternity. What was important in Gnosticism was that you know and believe the right things, things about God and the order of the universe and spiritual powers at work in the universe.

This is why Paul spends a significant part of the first chapter writing about who Christ is and revealing some very important truths about Christ that we don’t get anywhere else. Listen to his words about Christ in chapter 1:

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

21 Once you were alienated from God and were enemies in your minds because of your evil behavior. 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^[1]

Note what he says here: Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. God didn’t have a wife in heaven, of course, so “firstborn” doesn’t mean a literal birth, but that he is the primary and ultimate expression of every God-created element, every being, every creature born at any other time in the world. We know from John 1 that he was with God in the beginning when he began creating the world. In Genesis 1, we hear the refrain over and over again: “And God saw that it was good.”

But the ultimate knock to the Gnostic heresy is Colossians 1:19: “God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him.” That must have blown the Gnostics minds! In their thinking, there’s no way a holy God would have or could have put all his fullness into a physical form they believed to be thoroughly evil. And not only that, Paul emphasizes in vs. 22 that it is through Christ’s physical body, through his death on the cross, that we are reconciled to God. I can imagine the Gnostics were running away with their fingers in their ears screaming “la la la la la la, I can’t hear you!”

Paul goes on to exhort the Colossians to stand firm in the face of this heresy and in fact commends them for doing just that. And he also makes the argument against the Gnostic heresy personal by saying that his own physical suffering for the church is working to spread the gospel and encourage his readers all the more toward undying faithfulness.

And so we come to our passage this morning: Colossians 2:6–15. Let’s look first at vv. 6–8 and see how Paul makes the transition here to the heart of the passage that begins in vs. 9.

6 So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him, 7 rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.

8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.^{^[2]}

Paul recognizes that the Colossians are living faithfully and holding fast to the Gospel message that Epaphras had brought to them in the beginning. It’s good to know that not every church he wrote to had problems from within, as he must address in other letters. The Colossians are exemplary in that regard, but they are still dogged by the outside influence of some Gnostics.

So Paul again addresses the Gnostic heresy here with his warning about “hollow and deceptive philosophy” and the “elemental spiritual forces of this world,” which are probably nothing more than angels, demons, and perhaps some low-level spiritual powers and authorities. The Jews of Paul’s day had access to a great deal of apocryphal, pseudobiblical literature and oral traditions that told tales of angels, demons, and other spiritual forces. Some of these had the names of patriarchs and prophets attached to them, which may have given them a false veneer of credibility. But Paul is reaffirming that everything we need to know about our salvation and about how God interacts with his creation comes from Jesus himself. Let’s look at vv. 9–15 from the English Standard Version, mostly. In verses 11–13, I’m going to give my own translation, partially because most English translations either read too much into what Paul is saying or they don’t respect the strong verbal parallels with similar passages in Ephesians.

A For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, and you have been filled in him,

B who is the head of all rule and authority.

C In whom you were also circumcised with a hands-free circumcision by the putting off (τῇ ἀπεκδύσει, see vs. 15) of the body of flesh, that is, by the “circumcision” of Christ.

D You were buried AND raised with him in baptism

E through the faithful work of God

D’ who raised Christ from the dead. Even though you were dead in your sins

C’ and the uncircumcision of your flesh,

D” God made you alive with Christ, forgiving all your sins.

C” by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.

B ‘ He disarmed (disrobed? ἀπεκδυσάμενος) the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame,

A’ by triumphing over them in him.^[3]

Before we put meat on the bones here, I’d like you to take a look at how the passage is formatted above. You can see how it has successive indents as you read through the passage, and then the indents start to move leftward in the last half of the passage. The bold statement in the center (line E) that has the greatest indent is the key point in the passage: God raises us up and makes us alive in him because of his faithfulness to us. God’s faithfulness is what gives the Colossians the courage to stand up to the Gnosticism they encountered and to stand firm in their faith in spite of sometimes intense opposition. And God is still faithful today, so that you and I can have that same confidence in him to stand firm and carry on with our respective ministries and mission.

You will notice that I’ve italicized some words as well. In addition to similar index indents, those italicized words help you see the verbal parallels between the different parts of the passage. So, for example, in lines B & B’ of the passage, you’ll see the words “rule and authority” highlighted.

If you remember at the beginning, I asked you to dwell on the question, “What is the circumcision of Christ”? It is in the structure of this passage as I’ve laid it out here that we get that answer. Look at verse 11 (line C). Notice that a form of the word “circumcise” is used three times here. Then look down to line C’ (v. 13b): there’s the word “uncircumcision.” At that point, the outline “backtracks” a couple levels to previous verbal connections. Line C” (vs. 14), then, is at the same outline level as the circumcision phrases. But instead of using “circumcision” here, he makes a statement about the crucifixion: “This he removed from our midst, nailing it to the cross.” So here’s the answer to the question: “The circumcision of Christ” is in fact the crucifixion! The crucifixion is, if you’ll allow me this, the circumcision to end all circumcisions. Here’s the logic behind this.

Paul’s use of the phrase “removed from our midst” sounds very much like the statement in vs. 11 about the “putting off” of the body of flesh. And given that Colossians and Ephesians have dozens of verbal parallels, this sounds a lot like Paul’s discussion of this topic in Ephesians 4:22–24:

22 You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off (ἀποθέσθαι) your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; 23 to be made new in the attitude of your minds; 24 and to put on (ἐνδύσασθαι) the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.^[4]

The word for “putting on” the new self is the exact opposite of the word for “putting off” the body of flesh in Colossians. In Ephesians 2:3, Paul speaks of us “gratifying the cravings of our flesh,” from which God saved us. He says a little later in 2:15 something very similar to our Colossians passage about “waging war in his flesh against the commandments and regulations” and making peace with the new creation we are in Christ. The original act of circumcision was intended to set Israelite males apart from all others. It was a sign of the original covenant, but it had no power to save. The crucifixion, however, when we believe in its efficacy, not only sets us apart, but prepares our “new creation” bodies by putting off the whole old person and putting on the new to receive the fullness of Christ through the Holy Spirit.

This is what baptism (practiced as immersion in the early church) represents as well: connecting with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ and recognizing the connection with the body of Christ and newness of life we have in him. And all this is possible because, as the central verse of our passage says, God is faithful to work in and through us for the glory of his kingdom.

So, now that we have the theology out of the way, what does that mean for how we live our “new creation” lives in the kingdom of God? Well, Colossians isn’t just about theology. Here are just a few of the exhortations from Paul for us from chapters 1 & 2:

1:23: “Continue in your faith, established and firm, and do not move from the hope of the Gospel.”

1:28: “So that we may present everyone fully mature in Christ.”

2:2: “That they may be encouraged in heart and united in love.”

2:4: “That no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments.”

2:6–7: “Continue to live your lives in him, rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith…overflowing with thankfulness.”

2:8: “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.”

2:20: “Since you died with Christ to the elemental spiritual forces of this world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its rules?”

2:16: “Don’t let anyone judge you.” (repeat)

Here’s the bottom line: Colossians says that in Christ, you have been brought to fullness. What that means here is that you have everything you need in Christ to carry out the ministries and missions he’s called you to, individually or collectively. Your faith in Christ is your own. You’re the only one who will answer to God for it before the throne. Your faith doesn’t belong to a family member. It doesn’t belong to a friend. It doesn’t belong to a pastor. It doesn’t belong to a congregation, although we hope you’ll share your faith with your congregation, friends, and family. And dare I say it doesn’t belong to any earthly institution or establishment of religion. The Holy Spirit alone determines how his gifts are distributed, and he does so without regard to where you find yourself in any local congregation or church body.

And speaking of gifts of the Spirit, your calling in Christ is your own, except to the extent that that calling leads you to find common cause with others in the local congregation or the broader body of Christ. We are saved as a part of the body of Christ, not apart from the body of Christ. As Paul said in 2:16, “Don’t let anyone judge you” for how you choose to live out your calling. Romans says his gifts and calling are without repentance. God knew what he was doing when he called you to your ministry or mission, and no one should have the power to take that away from you.

And if you want to explore Colossians further, try reading it alongside Ephesians some time. I said at the top of my message that the congregation at Colossae probably started while Paul was preaching in Ephesus. It’s no accident that many of the themes in Ephesians have found their way into Colossians, but in a different order. Ephesians has a very sophisticated organization, while Colossians is, to be kind, a rearranged and shortened version of Ephesians for a different audience and purpose. I guarantee such a study would be very fruitful.

20 Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, 21 to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen.^[5]

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

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

^[3] The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. 2016. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles. Verses 11–13 are my own translation.

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

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

Comments (1)

July 26, 2012

The Mystery of Immersion (Baptism)

Filed under: Ecclesiology,Immersion/Baptism,New Testament,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 5:59 am

I have thoroughly enjoyed reading through the Greek NT again this year. I am constantly blown away by the truths God is revealing to me on at least a weekly basis, if not daily at times. On the one hand, my faith has been strengthened immensely by the journey, but on the other hand, after I think I’ve got some topic all figured out, God throws me a curve ball by raising new questions in my mind about what I believe and understand. None of these questions have ever raised any doubt in my mind about the lordship of Christ or the existence of God, but they do compel me to dig deeper to discover more profound truths. Lest I be misunderstood, don’t think that I’m onto some new teaching the church has never seen before: I think Paul and the other apostles knew much more about God and Jesus than any one man could ever uncover in a lifetime of study, although some have come close.

Some Questions about Immersion

One area that I have striven to understand is that of “immersion,” my translation of the Greek word βάπτισμα, which translators usually render “baptism.” The word itself comes from the Greek verb βάπτω plus an intensifying verbal suffix –ιζω. The intensifying suffix in my mind is something that should not be overlooked in understanding the word. Βάπτω means “I dip”, but the intensifier adds an important nuance: βαπτίζω = “I dip all the way” or “I immerse.” I was christened as an infant in the Presbyterian church, and I find value in that practice inasmuch as it serves as a dedication to the parents and the rest of the Christian community to help raise a child in the way of the Lord. But the infant still has to grow and make his or her own choices, so I don’t see it in any way as a guarantee of salvation or inclusion in the eternal kingdom of God.

That is precisely the concept about immersion that I have wrestled with over the years: Is it an absolute guarantee of salvation just because you willingly submit to it as an adult who understands the sacrament? Is there no other means by which we can enter the kingdom of heaven other than immersion? I’ve worked through many of these questions in other posts, and I’m convinced of the efficacy of immersion as an act of obedience at the minimum, but as I continue to reflect on the subject, new questions come to mind:

If, as some of my colleagues would say, immersion is absolutely essential, a sine qua non experience to be considered part of the body of Christ, then have we not limited God’s ability to save whom he wants to save?
If immersion is absolutely essential for the forgiveness of sins and entry into the kingdom, then is there some mystical transubstantiation of the water into the blood of Christ, since “without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness of sins”?

Putting God in Box

Whenever we make one act binding on a person who wants to become a Christ follower, we run the risk of becoming overly legalistic about it in the first place. Second, we also by default deemphasize other aspects of Christian faith which are equally important. Someone might say, “I’m a Christian because I got immersed at camp when I was a kid,” yet he cusses like a sailor, cheats on his wife, and drinks to excess every night. On the other hand, a man might study Scripture, come to Christ according to his own understanding, and lead others to Christ as well, but has only ever known a tradition of infant christening. If I were to say “Immersion is absolutely essential for salvation,” I would feel like I was putting God in a box and denying his power to “show mercy on whom [he] will show mercy.” If God can reverse the physical laws of nature by causing the earth to change its rotation, if God can suspend the law of Moses to allow David and his men to eat the grain dedicated to the priests, then God can welcome unimmersed believers into his eternal heavenly kingdom.

Requiring immersion as an absolute essential presents another problem in my mind: It implies that we have a perfect knowledge of the Scriptural teachings on salvation at least, and by default implies that perfect knowledge and praxis of a doctrine is required for salvation. Paul is clear in 1 Corinthians 13 that we know in part and prophesy in part. We don’t have perfect knowledge. Some things about God and how he operates in the world just cannot be known, and this leads into my second question: Just what is the mystery that is immersion?

Objective Truth or Subjective Mystery?

(Let me preface this section with this caveat: by “mystery,” I mean something something that cannot be known or explained by merely human reason, not necessarily a conundrum to solve. I’m using the term more like the modern day Orthodox church uses it, and as Paul used it in Ephesians.)

Here are some things I know for sure about immersion. Translations will be somewhat literal to stay close to the Greek.

Acts 2:38: Repent, and let each one of you be immersed in the name of the Lord Jesus Messiah into the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Forgiveness is a huge part of the experience of immersion. But there are other ways to experience forgiveness that are not directly linked to immersion, so immersion cannot be the only way to receive forgiveness (e.g., Matthew 6:12–15; Hebrews 9:11–28, esp. v. 22; 1 John 1:9).

Romans 6:3–4: Or don’t you know that we who have been immersed into Messiah Jesus have been been immersed into his death? We were therefore buried together with him through this immersion into death, in order that just as Messiah was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, likewise we also will walk in newness of life.

So the experience of immersion in Paul’s view in Romans is that it is linked to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. But Paul never mentions “forgiveness” in that chapter. The emphasis is on cleansing and purity.

Colossians 2:9–15: There are two allusions to blood in this passage that form an inclusio: circumcision and the cross. Immersion and forgiveness are tied together in the middle of the passage, along with the “cancelling” of the charge against us.

1 Peter 3:18–22: This is the trickiest of all passages. On the surface, it sounds like it is not the act itself that is important (“not the removal of dirt from the body”). But you still have to get immersed to make the “pledge.” Just as marriage vows have no weight without the wedding and marriage themselves, so the pledge is empty unless you demonstrate the faith to go through the water.

Here are the horns of the dilemma I find myself up against as I think about these things: On the one hand, if we are to ascribe to immersion an absolute salvific power, what is it about the act that gives it that power? If there is no forgiveness without the shedding of blood, and Paul says we are immersed into Christ’s death, then is there a transubstantiation of the waters of immersion into the blood of Christ, much like the Catholics believe about the eucharistic elements? Is the mystery of becoming one with Christ that our bodies are somehow in the waters of immersion transubtantiated into Christ’s body so that we have truly experienced both his death and resurrection? If immersion is more than just a symbol of our unity with Christ, but an actual salvific event, then there is truly a mystery and a greater power at work that our human minds may never be able to comprehend fully or explain adequately.

On the other hand, if the mystery of a salvific immersion lies in the transubstantiation of the water into blood or some other mysterious power, then I cannot in good conscience deny a similar power to the eucharistic elements, the bread and the cup of the Lord’s Table. After all, Jesus said, “This is my body…. This is my blood.” Jesus never said they were “symbols” as many in the Restoration Movement (my own affiliation) have purported. We have said they were symbols because we didn’t want to be too Catholic about it. I prefer to take Jesus’s words at face value. If he and the early church instituted weekly communion as Acts seems to suggest, then like salvific immersion, there is something more powerful to the act and the elements than just symbolism, wheat, and grapes.

As I grapple these “horns,” I am coming to the conclusion that to ascribe salvific power to immersion, which is the death and resurrection of Christ, while denying salvific power (by calling it a symbol) to the Lord’s Table, which is the body and blood of Christ, is a gross theological inconsistency. Either immersion and the Lord’s Table both have a mysterious salvific power, or they are both symbols that represent spiritual truths but do not effect them (and yes, I am using “effect” correctly as a verb there).

To Transubstantiate or Not to Transubstantiate

Now I do not believe that Christ is recrucified every time I partake of the of the bread and the cup. Yet I cannot escape the very direct statements of Jesus about the bread and the cup being his body and blood, respectively. I understand that the statements could be metaphorical at least, but the reality behind that seems too profound and has too much ultimate significance to abandon to the realm of metaphor. So while I do not think the bread or the cup transubstantiate into the body and blood of Christ, I do prefer to consider there is some suprametaphorical mystery in the act of taking the bread and cup that transcends the physical elements. At the very least, the presence of the risen Lord at the Table whenever you remember the Lord’s sacrifice should put to rest that the elements are merely symbols. And if the Lord is present at the Table, those who partake may call on him for whatever needs are burdening their hearts. Even those who have been on the fence about being a Christ follower, if they recognize this deeper signification in the Lord’s Table, may partake and call upon the Lord for their own salvation.

Nor do I believe the waters of immersion transubstantiate into the blood of Christ. However, given the importance of immersion in the Scriptures, I do think it’s possible that another kind of transubstantiation takes place that I alluded to earlier. In identifying with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ in immersion, we experience the mystery of becoming one with Christ. I think I could fully embrace the concept that we are transubstantiated into the physical body of Christ on the one hand, experiencing his death, burial, and resurrection “in the heavenly realms” as it were. But when we are immersed, we also make the public signification that we are in fact Christ followers and part of the body of Christ universal, the fellowship of all the saints. If you’re not convinced of the latter, I’m not implying any judgment here. If you’re a Christ follower who has not been immersed, I for one am in no position to say that your salvation is in question. God knows your heart; he knows the journey you’ve taken with him; and I trust that he will lead you and me into all truth as we continue to follow Christ’s leading in our lives and study his Word diligently.

Conclusion

Salvation is not merely a point in time when we say we want to be a Christ follower, whether that is in the waters of immersion, at the mourner’s bench, or raising your hand with your head bowed in the pew. Salvation is a process that happens in our lives. If it were not a process, why would Paul say “With fear and trembling fulfill (κατεργάζομαι) your own salvation, for God, who is working in you, also wills and accomplishes good things” (Philippians 2:12b–13)? Our obedience allows God to accomplish his good will in our lives. That is another great mystery that I will perhaps explore at another time. For now…

Peace,

Scott

Comments (5)

April 22, 2012

Sing a New Song (Psalm 98; Ephesians 5:18–21)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,Ephesians,New Testament,Old Testament,Psalms — Scott Stocking @ 7:34 am

NOTE: The following is revised and expanded from an article I wrote that appeared in the February 4, 2001, edition of The Christian Standard.

Sports fans are passionate people. They love their favorite teams and cheer them on with great enthusiasm. But sometimes their passion gets out of control, and violence erupts. We have seen this on a number of occasions, especially when a favorite team wins a big game or a national championship. Revelry and carousing take place in the streets, some even firing guns into the air, while others are hurt or injured from brawls that break out.

Don’t Get Drunk on Wine. . .

The country witnessed this behavior in 2000 when Los Angeles residents rioted after the Lakers won the NBA title. No doubt in many of these incidents of individuals or crowds getting out of hand, alcohol was a major contributing factor. Alcohol breaks down our inhibitions and our sense of self-control, and leads to all kinds of misbehavior. Although Midwesterners are a little more subdued in their celebrations, I have no doubt that St. Louisans lined Busch Brewery’s pockets after Games 6 and 7 of the 2011 World Series.

Expressing passion for a sports team can be turned into a positive model of worship. After all, the word “fan” comes from the word “fanatic.” Do we love God and express our praise for him as much as we do our favorite teams? Hasn’t God done much more than win a World Series or an NBA title? Now granted, I don’t want us going out and getting drunk for Jesus. Eph 5:18 provides a good balance for us when celebrating what God has done in our lives: “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.” Paul warns that controlled substances and uncontrolled behaviors are not the proper way to celebrate or to let off steam at the extremes of life. These only lead to trouble, hardship, and sin.

Instead, Be Filled with the Spirit

Instead, Paul exhorts his readers to “be filled with the Spirit.” The similarity here with the negative command against alcohol may escape some: with alcohol, we give up control of our faculties to a mindless substance, and our corrupt flesh nature rises to the surface. If you’ve ever had too much to drink, you know what I mean. You say things when you’re tipsy that you wouldn’t say when you’re sober. Your ability to drive and walk is impaired. Being filled with the Spirit, however, implies that we are giving up control to “the mind of Christ” and to the God who created us for his purposes—our “new man” shines forth.

Understanding this truth is one key to getting a handle on the “worship wars” that many congregations have experienced in the past twenty years. Many in the older generations (“the builders” and to a certain extent, the “boomers”) fuss at the younger generation because of the latter’s desire to have more contemporary choruses and the additional accompaniment of guitars, drums, and so on. At the same time the younger generations (“busters,” “X,” and “2K”) complain about the slow tempo of some traditional hymns and the unpopularity (from their perspective) of the piano or church organ, or both. (One is hard pressed to find a successful radio station today that plays only piano and organ music!) When I moved back to Nebraska in 2010, I got reconnected with the congregation that sent me off to seminary. The sermon series that first Sunday I was back was “I Love the 80s.” Each week, the worship team performed a different (secular) hit song from the 80s, and the pastor used Scripture to highlight the significant themes of the song.

The one who is critical of the worship style a congregation uses is equally as guilty as the one who condemns another for not jumping on board a congregation’s preferred worship style, or a congregation’s desire to establish a more culturally relevant style. Neither group is filled with the Spirit. Neither group is more holy or righteous than the other is simply because of what its preferred style of music is. If we are filled with the Spirit when we come to worship, we allow the Holy Spirit to break down our inhibitions about style, while he directs our attention to the substance of the hymn or chorus.

Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs

When we get beyond our personal preferences about style, only then can we truly appreciate the command to “sing a new song” to our Lord. Paul goes on in Eph 5:19–20 to explain what he means by being filled with the Spirit. The first aspect is “speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making music in your hearts to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything.” Paul here seems to bring the old (psalms, hymns) and the new (spiritual songs) together for the mutual edification of the body, and for the purpose of expressing thanks to our God. In fact, the five verbs that come after “be filled with the Spirit” are all subordinate to that command in some way, because they are all participles. Here is my outline for the organization of those verses:

Be filled (πληρόω) with the Spirit

Speaking (λαλέω) to one another with psalms (ψαλμός), hymns (ὕμνος), and spiritual songs (ᾠδή)

Singing (ᾄδω) and

Making music (ψάλλω) in your hearts to the Lord,

Always giving thanks (εὐχαριστέω) to God the Father…

Submitting (ὑποτάσσω) to one another out of reverence for Christ.

The passion in that exhortation is self-evident. The musical expression of God’s Word was a vital part of the fellowship experience of first century Christians. This has been true throughout the centuries in the Christian faith, and still holds true today. Passionate worship is one of the signs of a living, growing, fruit-bearing congregation. Passionate worship shows the world that we really do love our Lord with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind.

The second aspect of being filled with the Spirit is that we “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21). Like the Fifth Commandment (Ex 20:12), this command serves as general statement of transition between our spiritual relationships (worship of God within the body) and our earthly relationships (family and work). In the context of the former (worship), submitting to one another implies that we show mutual respect for each other’s preferred styles. If the Spirit is present, style is at best a secondary concern. What matters is keeping the unity of the Spirit with the bond of peace (Eph 4:3).

The New Song

The most common hymnbook in the pews of the churches I served in the past twenty years was Favorite Hymns of Praise (Tabernacle Publishing, Wheaton, IL) copyrighted in 1967. One day while preparing a sermon on the topic of the “new song,” I thumbed through the hymns and browsed an Internet site with hymn histories. I discovered that most of the hymns were in the public domain or the copyright had expired. In other words, they were written before copyright laws went into effect in the early 1920s. Although many of these hymns contain important, timeless truths about God and our faith, they are nonetheless “old.” The fact that they are old does not detract from their value, but it may detract from their appeal to younger generations.

The command to “sing to the Lord a new song” (Psalm 98:1) is not one which was negated by the New Covenant. All nine occurrences of the phrase “new song” in the NIV are connected with the victory, salvation, and justice of God.

God is still winning victories today, every time someone professes faith in him and receives baptism by immersion. In Luke 15, we see that the angels throw a heavenly party over each sinner who repents. Each soul has a unique story of how he or she came to know Christ, and each story is worthy of a “new song.”

Psalm 98

Psalm 98 is by far the most vivid statement of the “new song” in Scripture. The psalm consists of three stanzas of three verses each. In each of the first three verses, God’s salvation is mentioned. Verses 2–3 are particularly prophetic: the word for “salvation” (יְשׁוּעָה) is related to the word translated elsewhere as “Joshua,” or to the Greeks, “Jesus.”

Verses 4–6 make it clear that enthusiasm and passion are important, if not necessary, elements of worship. This second stanza begins and ends with the command to “shout for joy” (רוע). Verse 4 in the NIV is rendered “burst into jubilant song with music,” but the KJV reveals that the phrase is actually made up of only three verbs. “Burst” (KJV has “make a loud noise”; פצח) has the image of flood waters built up behind a dam or levee that suddenly break through clearing out everything in its path. “Jubilant song” (KJV has “rejoice”; רנן) is used of the mountains in vs. 8. “Music” (KJV has “sing praise”; זמר) is actually the root word for “psalm” (see the Ephesians passage above), which is a song sung to musical accompaniment.

God as Audience

Verse 6 is the crux of the entire psalm. The word “before” can also be translated “in the presence of.” When we “shout for joy in the presence of the Lord, the King,” the obvious conclusion here is that God is the audience. Those of us who worship, then, are the performers. The condition in Psalm 33:3 makes a great deal of sense, then: “play skillfully.” God wants us to give our best. Our best may not win us any recording contracts, but he does want us to worship with all that we are.

God wants us to praise him even when we do not feel like praising him, or even when we do not think our talents are good enough to contribute to the body. Jehoshaphat placed the choir out in front of the troops, and ultimately they did not have to lift a finger in violence against their enemies. God won the victory. Praise has a power that goes far beyond our ability and our comprehension. The point is: “SING!”

The final three stanzas reveal that worship is for all of God’s creation, not just his chosen people. In part, it is evangelistic. 1 Corinthians 14 indicates that orderly, comprehensible worship is a powerful tool for reaching the unsaved. If our forms of worship are foreign to the culture around us, we will not have a significant impact on our culture.

A Bold Example

One congregation I served in had a “talent” night. Two high school freshmen boys “rapped” Will Smith’s song “Just the Two of Us.” The “rap” is about Will Smith’s desire to be a good father to his son, in spite of his divorce from the boy’s mother. Nothing in the song is offensive to the Christian values of parenthood. I know some of our elderly members were squirming, if not fuming, from allowing that song to be performed in the sanctuary. But neither of these two young men has significant contact with their biological fathers. I interpreted that song as a heartfelt prayer of those two young men for a relationship like the one Will Smith sang about.

Conclusion

In worship, we long to draw near to our heavenly Father, just as those two teenagers longed to have a close relationship with their earthly fathers. Singing a new song to the Lord is one way to praise God for his victories in our lives, both past and future. If we are not singing new songs to the Lord, the rocks themselves will cry out declaring the righteous rule of our Savior and Lord.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

Comments (2)

January 13, 2012

Who Is, Who Was, and Who Is Coming (Revelation 1:4, 8; 4:8; 16:15; 1 Thessalonians 4:13–5:11)

Filed under: 1 Thessalonians,2 Peter,Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,Eschatology,Greek,New Testament,Revelation — Scott Stocking @ 7:41 pm

I’m feeling kind of rusty. It’s been over three weeks since I’ve posted anything, but then, in those three weeks, I had my kids for the holidays, the holidays themselves, three repairs on the car, two round trips to Illinois, my dad and step mom both in the hospital at different times, and a partridge in a pear tree. Life has been pretty hectic. Things are getting back to normal, though, and after getting reacquainted with my Civilization IV game, I’m ready to get back in the blogosphere.

For those of you who aren’t on my Facebook friends’ list, I did in fact accomplish my 2011 resolution: I read through the entire Greek New Testament. I realized I haven’t written anything about Revelation yet, so I think I’ll take the next few posts to do that. In the meantime, I’ve started reading through the Greek NT again, so I will continue to post on other topics as well in the coming year.

There’s No Future Like the Present

One of the things that struck me almost right off the bat in Revelation was the Greek version of the phrase “Who is, who was, and who is to come” (NIV; ὁ ὢν καὶ ὁ ἦν καὶ ὁ ἐρχόμενος). At first glance in the English translation, this looks like a present tense verb (“Who is”), a past tense verb (“Who was”; 4:8 switches the order of the first two), and a future tense verb (“Who is to come”). But ὁ ἐρχόμενος is not future tense! It is actually a present tense participle, so it should imply the continuous aspect, that is, the action is currently underway. While “who is to come” does signal Jesus is coming, it doesn’t reflect the emphasis of the present tense in Greek. A better translation might be “Who is already coming.” Yes, he’s on his way, and he’ll be here soon.

But this isn’t the only place the NIV and many other versions imply a future tense that isn’t there in the Greek. We find the same thing in 1 Thessalonians 5:2, where Paul says, “You know very well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.” The verb there is ἔρχεται., present tense. So the early church didn’t look at as Jesus’s second coming as something in the distant future. They thought of it as something under way even as they wrote and read the New Testament.

When Is He Coming?

Now I can hear the anticipation out there: What is Scott’s millennial view? Well, I won’t beat around the bush. I lean toward being a post-tribulation amillennialist. (I hope WordPress’s server is ready for the barrage of comments I’ll receive on that little revelation!) When Jesus died and rose again, he established his kingdom, the body of Christ, on earth through the preaching of Peter and subsequent missionary activity of his disciples and other followers. The church represents the “millennial” (I take the term to be figurative for “a long time”) reign of Christ. I also believe we are in the time when Satan has been let loose to deceive the nations and the elect, so I think we’re beyond the millennial period now and waiting for the final consummation of history in Jesus’s triumphant return.

I can hear some of you shouting at your computers and iPhones: “But what about the rapture? Isn’t that supposed to happen before Satan is let loose?” First of all, let me say that the word “rapture” (or any Greek equivalent) is never found in the New Testament. The events described in 1 Thessalonians 4:13–5:11 are commonly referred to as the “rapture.” But these events I think could more appropriately be called a resurrection. After all, the dead bodies are raised first in that passage. Those of us who are alive will be “snatched up” (ἁρπάζω) as a resurrection from our mortal flesh. This is the same word John uses to describe what happens to the child born of the woman in Revelation 12:5. It’s also the word used in Matthew 12:29 (NIV): “Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can plunder his house.”

This makes a nice segue to when I think Jesus’s second coming will happen. The watershed verse in my mind that tells me when Jesus is returning is Revelation 16:15: “Look, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is the one who stays awake and remains clothed, so as not to walk around naked and have others see his shame.” First of all, we have another present tense form of the word for “come,” so that aspect is reemphasized. Second, and more convincing in my mind, is the language of coming like a thief. I think this ties directly in with passages like Matthew 24:43, 1 Thessalonians 5:2, 2 Peter 3:10, and Revelation 3:3. No less than four different New Testament authors (Matthew, Paul, Peter, John) use this imagery of Christ’s return. But also notice when Jesus says he is coming: just before the final bowl of wrath is poured out. Since Paul connects the “coming” with the “snatching” in 1 Thessalonians 4–5, I have to believe that the body of Christ will remain on the earth during the entire tribulation of scrolls, trumpets, and bowls.

If You’ve Got Ears, Listen Up!

Don’t think you’re going to avoid the tribulation just because you’re a Christ follower. I don’t think God has ever let believers off that easily. Noah had to endure a flood; Abraham nearly sacrificed his own son; Moses spent 80 years in the wilderness; David spent years running from Saul. We Christ followers are going to experience (and may already be experiencing) the tribulation. Otherwise, why would Paul and Peter put such emphasis on being found holy, spotless, and blameless (Ephesians 1:4; 2 Peter 3:11–14)? Why the emphasis on “being ready” if we’re not going to live through it (or die in it!)?

Conclusion

Christ is on his way. We don’t know when: no one does. It may be 2012; it may not be until 2512. But we know he is true to his word, patient with the lost, and that he will come at the appointed time to win the final battle over sin and evil. Eternity with him will be glorious to say the least. I’m looking forward to it. I hope you are too.

Peace

Scott Stocking

Comments (2)

November 3, 2011

Qualifications of Male and Female Leaders in the Church (1 Timothy)

Filed under: 1 Timothy,Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,Ephesians,Titus,Women in Leadership — Scott Stocking @ 11:32 pm

I would have to venture a guess that 1 Timothy 3 is a close second to Ephesians as a section of Scripture to which I have devoted a significant amount of scholarly research through the years. In 1995, I presented my first professional paper at the Fellowship of Professors (now the Stone-Campbell Journal Conference) at St. Louis Christian College on 1 Timothy 3 and 5 and the leadership roles and qualifications Paul assigns to women in those passages. After reading through 1 Timothy 2 and 3 this weekend, I can see that, although my original paper was respectable, I have learned a great deal more about Greek structure, syntax, and semantics in the last 16 years that would greatly enhance my initial offering.

The appendix table at the end of this post catalogs significant word usage in 1 Timothy primarily, but also in the pastoral epistles generally, especially where gender and leadership roles not only are discussed but intersect. A quick glance at the table demonstrates first and foremost the overlapping language applied to men and women, whether the regular saint or the recognized leader. At the very least, being a faithful Christian undoubtedly made one notable as leadership material.

Women in Leadership?

I’ve spent considerable time putting that table together, so let me cut to the chase here, since my main purpose is talking about women in leadership in the body of Christ. In 1 Timothy 3, Paul is addressing the leadership core Timothy was responsible for training. The passage mentions the “elder” (ἐπίσκοπος episkopos \eh PEE skaw pawss\, lit. “overseer” [one who holds the title]; note that the word is singular in this passage) and “deacons” or “ministers” (διάκονος diakonos \dee AH kaw nawss\ also “servant”), but it also mentions “women.” If you look at any Bible with footnotes, you will see there is some significant difference in how the translations understand the reference to “women” in 3:11. I have arranged the following verses (all from Logos versions of the respective Bibles) in the order I consider to be the most literal translation to the freest translation, highlighting the English word translated from γυνή (gynē \goo NAY\, “woman, wife”) and the respective versions’ footnotes under each verse:

‎‎‎‎AV Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

‎‎ESV Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things.

Wives likewise must or Women likewise must [i.e. no “Their”]

‎‎NASB95 Women must likewise be dignified, not malicious gossips, but temperate, faithful in all things.

i.e. either deacons’ wives or deaconesses

NIV84 In the same way, their wives are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

deaconesses

‎‎NIV In the same way, the women are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.

possibly deacons’ wives or women who are deacons

‎‎‎‎NLT In the same way, their wives must be respected and must not slander others. They must exercise self-control and be faithful in everything they do.

or the women deacons; the Greek word can be translated women or wives

Message No exceptions are to be made for women—same qualifications: serious, dependable, not sharp-tongued, not overfond of wine.

You can see right away where the issue lies with this passage: Are the “women” the wives of the leaders mentioned (if “wives” is intended, then “deacons’ wives” is more likely, given that “overseer” is singular in this passage) or any women in the church? In 1 Timothy 2:9–12, Paul seems to address “women” generally, not “wives” specifically. Is there any reason to think he would switch up in this passage? The difference in translations is obvious, but none of the translations are wrong per se in translating the word either “women” or “wives.” What concerns me as a scholar about the translation is the “gloss” (a word added presumably for clarification) of the plural possessive pronoun “their” in some of the versions. (You will notice that I italicized it in the verses, a common practice in more literal translations to indicate the word is not directly translated from a Greek word in the text.) Granted, this is a plausible translation, but not a necessary one. It is also highly interpretive. I’m not saying the Bible translation committees necessarily had agendas or were wrong to add the gloss, but it is something that the savvy Bible student should consider when studying this passage.

A Structure Word

Another word that reveals the structure of the passage is ὡσαύτως (hōsautōs \hoh SOW tohss\ “likewise”). The word is found 17 times in the NT, including four times in 1 Timothy, and implies not only a similarity of action, but a similarity of the subjects of those actions being compared. What is interesting is this word is found three verses earlier, in 1 Timothy 3:8: “Deacons likewise…” The question is, “Like what?” or “Like whom?” The obvious answer is like the elder in vs. 2. This point is even more obvious when one considers that there is no main verb in vv. 8 or 11: the verb is actually borrowed from vs. 2: “It is necessary for the elder [and deacons and women] to be….” The passage has a parallel structure signifying three leadership roles: elder, deacon, and women.

So what does that mean for the role of women specifically? I think it is important at this point to bring in a couple more passages of Scripture so we can have a broader view of the role of women in early church leadership. Titus 1–2 gives further instructions on elders (both the ἐπίσκοπος and the πρεσβῦτ- kind). The role of the “older women” (πρεσβῦτις presbytis \press BOO tihss\) was to teach the younger women to be more Christ-like. I think that is a perfect example of an appropriate role for female leaders in the church: teaching younger women. In 1 Timothy 5, Paul uses similar language to 1 Timothy 3 in describing the widows, especially those who are older, will probably not remarry, and have significant time to devote to serving the Lord and his people (see also 1 Corinthians 7:8, 34b). It would not surprise me to find that Paul’s reference to women leaders in 1 Timothy 3:11 included widows, especially since the larger context of the epistle supports that idea.

Backtracking

Now that I’ve put out there what is sure to be controversial among my more conservative readers, I want to backtrack a bit and talk about the first part of 1 Timothy 3. I mentioned above that the word for “elder” in v. 2 is singular. The passage actually uses a feminine form of the word for elder, which implies the office or the abstract concept of eldership, not necessarily the gender of the person holding the office. The question to ask is, “Why is this term singular when ‘deacons’ (v. 8) and ‘women’ (v. 11) are plural? Don’t most churches have more than one elder?”

A more literal rendering of ἐπίσκοπος may shed some light on the subject. The word is a compound of ἐπί (“over”) and σκοπός (“see, watch” e.g. “scope”), so some literally translate the word “overseer” (see for example 1 Peter 2:25, where Peter describes Jesus as “the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls”), and it eventually made its way into English as “bishop” (Gk episkopos > Latin episcopus > Old English bisceop [Merriam-Webster]), which is how some older English versions render the word. I have run in some circles where the concept of a lead pastor is frowned upon by leadership. One man should not have such authority over a congregation, so they say. But I think we find support for that concept in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1–2. Certainly any pastor should have the qualifications of an elder, and I would argue that the pastor should be considered a member of the eldership in whatever church he (or she!) serves. The job of an “overseer” (for I equate “overseer” with “senior” or “lead pastor”) is not to run the whole show alone, but to equip others for works of service to build up the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11–13). I am quite comfortable with the concept of a senior pastor when the duties and responsibilities of such are rightly understood and when such a person lives up to those responsibilities.

As a side note, when the words for elder are used in the plural (Acts 20:28, Philippians 1:1 for ἐπίσκοπος), I believe they refer to the group of those who lead individual house churches. Titus was instructed to appoint πρεσβυτέρους (plural form, 1:5), but then Paul immediately writes about the ἐπίσκοπος (singular, 1:7).

Conclusion

I think it is important that we have a proper understanding of Scripture, otherwise I wouldn’t write this blog. But it is equally important that we not force one view upon another. As I discussed in the 1 Corinthians post on tongues, love must come first in any doctrinal discussion. Teaching without love and compassion is little more than indoctrination. As a pastor, I wouldn’t impose the concept of women in leadership on a congregation that wasn’t ready for it, but I wouldn’t hesitate to teach the concept whenever the opportunity arose. And I would always make sure the leadership in any church I served understood what I believe about the subject without insisting that they all jump on board. I am presenting the evidence here: it’s up to others whether they choose to be convinced by my reasoning and studies.

If you have stories about how your congregation has handled the role of women in leadership, I would love for you to share them in the comments. Thank you for reading!

Peace,

Scott Stocking

Appendix: Word Usage by Gender and Office in the Pastoral Epistles

Word	Transliteration/ Pronunciation	Meaning	Men^a	Women^b	Elders^c	Deacons^d	Others
ἡσύχιος	*hēsychios* \hay SOO khee awss\	adjective: quiet	1 Ti 2:2	1 Ti 2:2; 1 Pe 3:4*
ἡσυχία,	*hēsychia* \–KHEE ah\	quietness	1 Ti 2:12(?); 2 Th 3:12^e	1 Ti 2:11–12; 2 Th 3:12
εὐσέβεια^f	*eusebeia* \you SEH bay ah\	godliness	1 Ti 2:2, 3:16, 4:7–8^g; 6:11^c Ti 2:12 (εὐσεβῶς)	1 Ti 2:2, 3:16; Ti 2:12 (εὐσεβῶς)		4:7–8; 6:11^c	1 Ti 5:4 (εὐσεβέω to widows);
θεοσέβεια	*theosebeia* \theh aw–\	godliness		1 Ti 2:10*
σεμνότης	*semnotēs* \sem NAW tayss\	dignity	1Ti 2:2, 3:4; Ti 2:7		1 Ti 3:4; Ti 2:2
σεμνός	*semnos* \–NAWSS\	dignified	1 Ti 3:8; Ti 2:2	1 Ti 3:11		1 Ti 3:8
κόσμιος*	*kosmios* \KAWSS mee awss\	respectable; appropriate	1 Ti 3:2	1 Ti 2:9	1 Ti 3:2
κοσμέω	*kosmeō* \–MEH oh\	I adorn		1 Ti 2:9, 1 Pe 3:5			Ti 2:10 (slaves)
πρέπει	*prepei* \PREH pay\	verb: it is proper for		1 Ti 2:10			Ti 2:1 (sound doctrine)
ὑποταγή	*hypotagē* \hoo paw tah GAY\	submission		1 Ti 2:11			1 Ti 3:4 (children)
ὑποτάσσω	hypotassō \–TAHSS soh\	I submit to		1 Co 14:34
ἐπιτρέπω	*epitrepō* \eh pee TREH poh\	I permit		1 Co 14:34
αὐθεντέω*	*authenteō* \ow then TEH oh\	I usurp authority		1 Ti 2:12
σωφροσύνη*	*sōphrosynē* \soh fraw SOO nay\	sound judgment; moderation		1 Ti 2:9, 15
σωφρόνως*	*sōphronōs* \–FRAW nohss\	moderately	Ti 2:12	Ti 2:12
σωφρονισμός*	*sōphronismos* \–nee SMOSS\	sound judgment; moderation	2 Ti 1:7^h	2 Ti 1:7^h
σώφρων*	*sōphrōn* \–frohn\	adjective: moderate	Ti 2:2	Ti 2:5 (younger)	1 Ti 3:2; Ti 1:8, 2:2
μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα	*mias gynaikos andra*	“one-woman man”	1 Ti 3:2, 12 (plural); Ti 1:6
ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή	*henos andros gynē*	“one-man woman”		1 Ti 5:9			1 Ti 5:9 (widows)
νηφάλιος*	*nēphalios* \nay FAH lee awss\	temperate	1 Ti 3:2; Ti 2:2	1 Ti 3:11	1 Ti 3:2; Ti 2:2
προί̈στημι	*proistēmi* \praw EESS tay mee\	I manage	1 Th 5:12; 1 Ti 3:4–5, 12; Ti 3:8, 14	1 Th 5:12; Ti 3:8, 14	1 Ti 3:4–5; 5:17	1 Ti 3:12	1 Ti 5:14 (οἰκοδεσποτέω young widows manage home)
πάροινος*	*paroinos* \PAH roy nawss\	addicted to wine	1 Ti 3:3; Ti 1:7
μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας	*mē oinō pollō prosechontas*	not given to much wine	1 Ti 3:8			1 Ti 3:8
διάβολος	*diabolos* \dee AH baw lawss\	devil; slanderer	1 Ti 3:6–7	1 Ti 3:11; Ti 2:3	1 Ti 3:6–7
ὡσαύτως	*hōsautōs* \hoh SOW tohss\	adverb: likewise		1 Ti 2:9, 3:11		1 Ti 3:8	1 Ti 5:24 (bad & good deeds)
ἀνεπίλημπτος	*anepilēmptos* \ah neh PEE laym ptawss\	blameless	1 Ti 3:2	1 Ti 5:7	1 Ti 3:2		1 Ti 5:7 (widows)

* Indicates that all occurrences of the word in the New Testament are listed here.

^a Translated from ἀνήρ (anēr \ah NAYR\, “man, husband”; 1 Ti 2:8, 12; 3:2, 12; 5:9; Ti 1:6; 2:5); πρεσβύτης (presbytēs \press BOO tayss\, “old man, elder [holds title]”; Ti 2:2; and πρεσβύτερος (presbyteros \press BOO teh ross\, comparative adjective “older man, elder [holds title]”; 1 Ti 5:1–2, 17, 19; Ti 1:5; 1 Pet 5:1, 5). The generic word for “human” (ἄνθρωπος anthrōpos \AHN throw pawss\) is presumed to refer to both men and women unless context suggests otherwise.

^b Translated from γυνή (gynē \goo NAY\, “woman, wife”; 1 Ti 2:9–12, 14; 3:2, 11–12; 5:9; Ti 1:6); πρεσβῦτις (presbytis \press BOO tihss\ “old woman, elder [holds title(??)]”; Ti 2:3).

^c Translated from ἐπισκοπή (episkopē \eh pihss kaw PAY\, “office/function of elder”; 1 Ti 3:1); ἐπίσκοπος (episkopos \eh PIHSS kaw pawss\, “elder” [one who holds the title]; 1 Ti 3:2; Ti 1:7); πρεσβύτης; πρεσβῦτις; and (συμ*)πρεσβύτερος ([sym]presbyteros \[soom] press BOO teh ross\ comparative adjective “older man, [fellow] elder [holds title]”; 1 Ti 5:1–2, 17, 19; Ti 1:5; 1 Pet 5:1*, 5); πρεσβυτέριον (presbyterion press boo TEH ree awn\ noun “council of elders [holds title]”; 1 Ti 4:14).

^d Transliterated from διάκονος (diakonos \dee AH kaw nawss\ “servant, deacon”; 1 Ti 3:8, 12; 4:6).

^e Part of a command to the disruptive busybodies identified in 2 Th 3:11.

^f Generic references or descriptions in 4:8 (1x); 6:3–6 (3x).

^g Verb is second person singular, so presumably referring to Timothy only.

^h A generalized statement in the midst of specific instructions to Timothy himself.

NOTE: Minor formatting issues were fixed on 11/4, along with clearing up a dangling modifier in the first paragraph. Other minor edits made 1/26/22.

Comments (4)

March 12, 2023

March 4, 2023

Background

Advent: Preparing for the Coming Messiah

Epiphany

Lent

Conclusion (for now)

February 27, 2023

Historical Background

Word Study on ἐπιφαίνω (epiphainō)

Background of the Magi

Prophetic Background for Epiphany

What Epiphany Means for Us

December 21, 2022

Abortion

“Exposure”: The Precursor to Abortion

Modern History of Abortion and Genocide

Gender Confusion

Reassignment or Mutilation?

Drag Queens: Objectifying and Degrading Women

Balancing Survival and Compassion

October 3, 2022

August 7, 2022

July 26, 2012

Some Questions about Immersion

Putting God in Box

Objective Truth or Subjective Mystery?

To Transubstantiate or Not to Transubstantiate

Conclusion

April 22, 2012

Don’t Get Drunk on Wine. . .

Instead, Be Filled with the Spirit

Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs

The New Song

Psalm 98

God as Audience

A Bold Example

Conclusion

January 13, 2012

There’s No Future Like the Present

When Is He Coming?

If You’ve Got Ears, Listen Up!

Conclusion

November 3, 2011

Women in Leadership?

A Structure Word

Backtracking

Conclusion

Search for posts.

Latest Posts

Pages and Class Materials

Find posts in these categories.

Follow Blog via Email

Blogroll