How do you feel about evangelism? How often do you share your faith? Are you a witness for the Lord? How many people got saved because of you? Do these questions make you a little uncomfortable? The more important question to answer should be, "Is what we do Biblical?" There are those who find sharing their faith an easy thing to do. Some are gifted by the Spirit of God to be evangelists. Then there are the rest of us who struggle a bit, or maybe a lot. The evangelical movement has touched most of us and I don't intend to diminish what has been and is being done but it seems we have overlooked a few things. Like, what the scriptures say, what Messiah Jesus did. As well as how Peter, James, John, and the Apostle Paul evangelized those around them. If we are honest our methods have little in common with the Scriptures.
My early religious training was in a protestant church that rarely referred to the Bible. A Social Gospel was the Sunday teaching. I came to know the truth about Yeshua and my need for a savior through a neighborhood Bible study. I eventually found my way to an evangelical Baptist Church where the Bible was taught every Sunday. It was here I first encountered "evangelism". Over the years I have attended training sessions and learned about the "Four Spiritual Laws", "Evangelism Explosion" and how to use "F.O.R.M." to talk to people about Jesus (Family, Occupation, Religion, Message). I went to rallies and crusades where folks were challenged, maybe even coerced, to accept Jesus. The formulas had commonalities and the goal was the same. Get the person to pray to receive Jesus. Not a bad goal. Just not the way the Scriptures reveal evangelism.
If you look at the examples of New Testament preachers, including Jesus and Paul, no one is ever asked to come forward, and no one is asked to pray to receive Jesus. No Apostle ever tells the people in the crowd to turn to their neighbor and ask if they are a believer. There is never a time when Paul says, "With every eye closed and no one looking around, just slip up your hand if you want to be saved." Peter does not turn to the crowd and ask, "If you were to die today would you go to heaven?" I guess they never attended an evangelism class.
Jesus did talk about the responsibilities His disciples would carry as they told the Good News of His death and resurrection. In Acts 1:8 Jesus says simply, "You shall be my witnesses." Not "should be" or "might be", but "shall be". Why? Because the Holy Spirit has come upon us. Witnessing does not appear to be something we train for but rather an outgrowth of who we are and our relationship with Messiah. Jesus doesn't even use those guilt motivators. I was told every person I ever talked to was a "divine appointment" to share the message of Christ. I was told if I failed to do so their blood would be on my hands. I was asked, "If your neighbors house was on fire would you let them burn? If you haven't asked them to pray to receive Jesus they will burn forever and it will be your fault!" Such encouraging and inspiring words. I do not see a lot of motivation by guilt when it come to Jesus talking about the Kingdom of Heaven.
Our Messiah had another method of sharing the good news to those around us. He gave a "how to" to go along with the "You will be" from Acts 1. It is found in Matthew 28. However, most translations hide the simple instructions. They read,"Go therefor and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you: and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19-20). However the word "go" is a present participle. It means, as you are going". Jesus' instruction is not about telling the Gospel. It about living the Gospel. As you are going through the routine things of life be making disciples and teaching them everything I taught you. There is no way you can teach someone everything the Lord taught at an alter call. Our faith is much more about community than getting someone to pray a prayer.
Matthew 28:19-20 actually reflects Deuteronomy 6:3-7. We are to love God and to have His word on our heart and to teach what we know consistently. When? Just talk about it when you are in your house or when you walk outside or when you lie down and when you rise up. All you know about the Lord and your relationship with Him is simply on display, or should be, all the time. You have no choice, you will be His witness. Your comfort, your care,your compassion, will be there before your neighbors. You know, when you help them shovel snow, of fix the fence or watch their dog. Your tools for evangelism maybe a hammer, cookies, a ride work, a hot meal, or a listening ear. As you are going about life at work, or the gym, or at your child's dance recital, be who the Savior wants you to be. And through those relationships you will have opportunities to introduce folks to the one you call Savior.
As Jesus walked along He made twelve disciples. Paul took Silas, Timothy, Luke and others with him. It takes time to "teach all things". It take a relationship to make a disciple. Jesus did not "witness" to everyone He had contact with. Neither did Paul, Peter, or John. They lived out the truth of the Kingdom of God and people often came to them. Your neighbors and co-workers make their own decisions. As do you. So give up the guilt and choose to walk in obedience to the Lord and thus let your light shine.
2016 is your year to make a difference and you don't even have to take an evangelism class. Just walk with Jesus and invite someone to come along on the journey. Show them what it is to love and follow Jesus.
Tuesday, December 29, 2015
Sunday, December 20, 2015
Yes, He Wasn't Born on Christmas. Yes, I Still Put Up a Tree. Get Over It.
It's that most wonderful time of the year. When well meaning folks send me emails and links to let me know, prepare to be shocked and amazed, that Jesus wasn't born on December 25th. They go on to inform me that Christmas, and all our holiday traditions are bogus and possibly, if not probably, sinful.
The picture they paint and the facts they share are indeed true. Pretty much all we do at Christmas has little or nothing to do with the Bible. One wrote, "We need to be bold enough to step away from the world's practice and be true to Jesus. Truth and accuracy matter!" How could one argue such a sound argument? Oh, by the way His name was Yeshua, not Jesus. Jesus is an English rendition of a Greek name. Jesus is just the name we traditionally use. Yeshua is Jewish..... Just to be accurate. (Yes, I know. Sarcasm is my first language)
So what are the issues we face as we come to Christmas? And just how can we deal with them?
Yeshua was born in Bethlehem, according to Luke 2:4. "When" is the question that relates to Christmas. It was when Cyrenius was governor of Syria; however, that is not much help as to pinpointing a date. Luke tells us that this was during one of the tax registrations of Caesar Augustus. As there were a few such registrations, and folks had months to register, this likewise gives us little to go on. We get some assistance from Luke 2:8. Here we are told that there were shepherds out in the fields, apparently close to Bethlehem, watching their sheep. Now we know it was the spring or fall. In winter the sheep would be in pens and in summer they would be in the high country. Spring seems nice if you want to tie it to the Passover lambs being born and fall works well if you calculate the time John the Baptizer was born.
Either way it is not December 25th and it is not close to Winter. (side note, the Jewish calendar does not have a December, if you want another reason to not like the 25th). December was chosen, most likely, by Constantine, to appease the pagans who celebrated the winter equinox. Making Rome a "Holy Empire" took some creative political compromise to make everyone happy. So.... Taa Daa. It was the Birth of Jesus celebration.
So the critics are right, no birth of Messiah in December and, yes, there is a tie to a pagan celebration. Now what about that tree you like to decorate? Lots of possibilities here. We have St. Boniface stopping a child sacrifice to an oak tree by cutting down the tree. Tradition holds that an evergreen grew back in its place, symbolizing new life. Druids in Germany decorated evergreens to appease the spirits that inhabited the trees, and after becoming Christians they continued the tradition, the new reason being evergreens spoke of eternal life and their shape pointed to heaven. Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and lots of other early cultures decorated their homes with evergreens as a symbol of the hope of spring. There is nothing Biblical about the tree nor any evidence that an evergreen was used to make the cross for our Lord's crucifixion. It probably has some tie to pagan practice. However, I never think of Druids when I see a decorated evergreen.
Then there is Santa, or Father Christmas, or Kris Kringle, or Saint Nick. At least this has some historic verification. Saint Nicholas was a fourth century Bishop who cared about people. Tradition is that he provided dowries for two sisters so they could get married. He was one of the Bishops to participate in the Council of Nicaea, under the direction of Constantine. His generous spirit evolved into the stories and traditions we hold today. There is nothing Biblical here, other than the call for the followers of God and Messiah to be generous and giving people. Also, Yeshua didn't wear socks so He could not hang them by the chimney with care. (by the way, the King James translation of Zechariah 2:6 is not a proof text for Santa Clause "Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, saith the LORD.") I guess this would be another reason to kill that tradition.
However, we may have overlooked something here. Traditions, even if they are not Biblical, can have value. This year my daughter and I decorated our artificial Christmas tree. She found a hand made ornament given to her by Mrs. Bly back when she was a little girl. Mrs Bly was a lovable grandmother to all the kids in our fellowship back in Virginia. She had been my daughter's Sunday School teacher. The ornament is not just a piece of wood. It is a treasured memory of a Godly woman who has touched my daughter's life. Mrs. Bly lost her battle with cancer years ago, but her memory lives on through a simple Christmas tree ornament. I guess, to be Biblical, I should deny my daughter this precious memory.
Let me make one last observation that actually does come from Scripture. Matthew 2 gives us an account of the Magi from the East coming to find the King of the Jews. It is most likely that these astronomers were from Babylon or Persia. As they studied the heavens they saw a remarkable sight. A new star and it seemed to be moving. Not a typical shooting star but a movement with purpose. They checked the scrolls, perhaps dating back to the time of Daniel, and found the reference to the star of Jacob. They made the perilous journey, of several months, and came into Jerusalem, the city of the king. But, there was no new born king.
Herod called for the Jewish scribes and chief priests to learn where Messiah was to be born. The Magi were directed to Bethlehem, the city where David was born. The Magi then made haste and came to the home where Joseph, Miriam and the young child live (not the stable, for many months have passed from the night of Messiah's birth). They were most likely Gentiles. They came at a random time. What we do know is that it was not Messiah's birthday.
Upon arriving at the home of the carpenter, the Magi bow down and worship the young King of the Jews and give gifts. They are good gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Not something a toddler could use, but I am sure it came in handy when Joseph, Miriam and the child had to flee to Egypt. The point I am making is that Gentile astronomers from a pagan country made a difficult journey to celebrate the first advent and birth of the King of the Jews. His name was Yeshua. They worshiped Him and praised God for His arrival. It was not Messiah's birthday. It was not a Scriptural holy day or celebration. It is not found in the Bible. They simply came to worship the King of the Jews and to Celebrate His birth. From what I can tell in the record Matthew left us, God seems fine with their actions.
I am a little baffled that setting aside a time to praise God and celebrate the arrival of His Son is somehow inappropriate or evil. It seems any day is a good day to celebrate the reality that "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten Son of God." For me, it would have been amazing to stand with the Magi and worship the King, even if it wasn't really His birthday. To shower Him with praise and gifts just because I was there. Just because I chose to.
So I will have fun and put up some lights. I will decorate my tree with my daughter and treasure the memories. I will celebrate His birth and first advent as I wait in expectation for His return.
You can do as you think is best for you. However, if you don't like my tree, well,no offense intended, get over it.
The picture they paint and the facts they share are indeed true. Pretty much all we do at Christmas has little or nothing to do with the Bible. One wrote, "We need to be bold enough to step away from the world's practice and be true to Jesus. Truth and accuracy matter!" How could one argue such a sound argument? Oh, by the way His name was Yeshua, not Jesus. Jesus is an English rendition of a Greek name. Jesus is just the name we traditionally use. Yeshua is Jewish..... Just to be accurate. (Yes, I know. Sarcasm is my first language)
So what are the issues we face as we come to Christmas? And just how can we deal with them?
Yeshua was born in Bethlehem, according to Luke 2:4. "When" is the question that relates to Christmas. It was when Cyrenius was governor of Syria; however, that is not much help as to pinpointing a date. Luke tells us that this was during one of the tax registrations of Caesar Augustus. As there were a few such registrations, and folks had months to register, this likewise gives us little to go on. We get some assistance from Luke 2:8. Here we are told that there were shepherds out in the fields, apparently close to Bethlehem, watching their sheep. Now we know it was the spring or fall. In winter the sheep would be in pens and in summer they would be in the high country. Spring seems nice if you want to tie it to the Passover lambs being born and fall works well if you calculate the time John the Baptizer was born.
Either way it is not December 25th and it is not close to Winter. (side note, the Jewish calendar does not have a December, if you want another reason to not like the 25th). December was chosen, most likely, by Constantine, to appease the pagans who celebrated the winter equinox. Making Rome a "Holy Empire" took some creative political compromise to make everyone happy. So.... Taa Daa. It was the Birth of Jesus celebration.
So the critics are right, no birth of Messiah in December and, yes, there is a tie to a pagan celebration. Now what about that tree you like to decorate? Lots of possibilities here. We have St. Boniface stopping a child sacrifice to an oak tree by cutting down the tree. Tradition holds that an evergreen grew back in its place, symbolizing new life. Druids in Germany decorated evergreens to appease the spirits that inhabited the trees, and after becoming Christians they continued the tradition, the new reason being evergreens spoke of eternal life and their shape pointed to heaven. Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, and lots of other early cultures decorated their homes with evergreens as a symbol of the hope of spring. There is nothing Biblical about the tree nor any evidence that an evergreen was used to make the cross for our Lord's crucifixion. It probably has some tie to pagan practice. However, I never think of Druids when I see a decorated evergreen.
Then there is Santa, or Father Christmas, or Kris Kringle, or Saint Nick. At least this has some historic verification. Saint Nicholas was a fourth century Bishop who cared about people. Tradition is that he provided dowries for two sisters so they could get married. He was one of the Bishops to participate in the Council of Nicaea, under the direction of Constantine. His generous spirit evolved into the stories and traditions we hold today. There is nothing Biblical here, other than the call for the followers of God and Messiah to be generous and giving people. Also, Yeshua didn't wear socks so He could not hang them by the chimney with care. (by the way, the King James translation of Zechariah 2:6 is not a proof text for Santa Clause "Ho, ho, come forth, and flee from the land of the north, saith the LORD.") I guess this would be another reason to kill that tradition.
However, we may have overlooked something here. Traditions, even if they are not Biblical, can have value. This year my daughter and I decorated our artificial Christmas tree. She found a hand made ornament given to her by Mrs. Bly back when she was a little girl. Mrs Bly was a lovable grandmother to all the kids in our fellowship back in Virginia. She had been my daughter's Sunday School teacher. The ornament is not just a piece of wood. It is a treasured memory of a Godly woman who has touched my daughter's life. Mrs. Bly lost her battle with cancer years ago, but her memory lives on through a simple Christmas tree ornament. I guess, to be Biblical, I should deny my daughter this precious memory.
Let me make one last observation that actually does come from Scripture. Matthew 2 gives us an account of the Magi from the East coming to find the King of the Jews. It is most likely that these astronomers were from Babylon or Persia. As they studied the heavens they saw a remarkable sight. A new star and it seemed to be moving. Not a typical shooting star but a movement with purpose. They checked the scrolls, perhaps dating back to the time of Daniel, and found the reference to the star of Jacob. They made the perilous journey, of several months, and came into Jerusalem, the city of the king. But, there was no new born king.
Herod called for the Jewish scribes and chief priests to learn where Messiah was to be born. The Magi were directed to Bethlehem, the city where David was born. The Magi then made haste and came to the home where Joseph, Miriam and the young child live (not the stable, for many months have passed from the night of Messiah's birth). They were most likely Gentiles. They came at a random time. What we do know is that it was not Messiah's birthday.
Upon arriving at the home of the carpenter, the Magi bow down and worship the young King of the Jews and give gifts. They are good gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Not something a toddler could use, but I am sure it came in handy when Joseph, Miriam and the child had to flee to Egypt. The point I am making is that Gentile astronomers from a pagan country made a difficult journey to celebrate the first advent and birth of the King of the Jews. His name was Yeshua. They worshiped Him and praised God for His arrival. It was not Messiah's birthday. It was not a Scriptural holy day or celebration. It is not found in the Bible. They simply came to worship the King of the Jews and to Celebrate His birth. From what I can tell in the record Matthew left us, God seems fine with their actions.
I am a little baffled that setting aside a time to praise God and celebrate the arrival of His Son is somehow inappropriate or evil. It seems any day is a good day to celebrate the reality that "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory of the only begotten Son of God." For me, it would have been amazing to stand with the Magi and worship the King, even if it wasn't really His birthday. To shower Him with praise and gifts just because I was there. Just because I chose to.
So I will have fun and put up some lights. I will decorate my tree with my daughter and treasure the memories. I will celebrate His birth and first advent as I wait in expectation for His return.
You can do as you think is best for you. However, if you don't like my tree, well,no offense intended, get over it.
Sunday, December 13, 2015
God Commands You to Always be Angry or Culture Matters
Do you ever get angry? Ever feel guilty about it? What if you knew there was a verse that not only allowed you to get angry but was a command from God Himself to be angry or, more precisely, to be perpetually angry. There is a catch as the verse goes on to say you are not to sin while you are perpetually angry. The verse is found in the Epistle to the Believers in Ephesus. It is in Chapter 4 verse 26, "Be angry, and do not sin. do not let the sun go down on your wrath." That seems a little odd to be told to be angry perhaps it would be well to dig a little deeper.
The word "anger" is the word orgizo in the Greek and it means to be angry, aroused to wrath, to be angry with someone, not something, whether it is an individual, a nation or Satan. It is a present, passive, imperative verb. Present means the activity is ongoing, something done perpetually. The passive voice tells us that it happens to us. We are passive so the anger rules over us not the other way around. Finally it is an imperative or a command.
Paul writes to the Ephesian Believers that they are commanded to be continually controlled by anger. Many commentaries fail to recognize the verb and give us the impression that we all occasionally "lose it" and that is okay. It is a common issue among humans. Or they go with the second option suggesting that we need "righteous indignation" when it comes to the deterioration of the world and the declining moral condition of society. To have righteous indignation against Satan and the sin that surrounds us. Just don't let this anger cross the line and become sin. A present, active, imperative verb.
Did you notice the change in voice? Anger is to control us but we are to be actively involved in not sinning. And, apparently, if we cross the line, we are not to let the sun go down on our wrath. Once again the word is a present, active, imperative verb. So we are commanded to always have an active role in getting rid of the "wrath" or parorgizo, meaning rage, anger, exasperation and, in a broader sense, rebellion. The Apostle Paul appears to be telling us that we are commanded to be perpetually controlled by anger toward someone, yet also commanded to be personally responsible to not sin or cross the line of disobedience to God's standards, and commanded to never let the day end with any rage, anger or rebellion present in our lives.
There are a few problems with all of this analysis. First, Ephesians 4:31 reads, "Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice [emphasis mine]." This is likewise a command and the word "anger" is orge, the same root as orgizo back in verse 26. Thus, Paul tells us to be perpetually angry and never be angry in the same passage. The idea that this is all about "righteous indignation" does not fit the context.
The whole letter, and chapter 4 in particular, is about unity. Being "one". One body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all. As members of one another, we are to put away all lying, and speak the truth to his neighbor. There is nothing at all about the world or a "right" to be indignant toward the world or anyone else. As to the concept of being perpetually controlled by anger and never crossing the line to sin.......... well, good luck with that. Anger and rebellion go hand in hand and perpetually angry people seldom let go of their wrath before sundown. That situation leads to a violation of Ephesians 4:27, "nor give place to the devil".
Again, we find a present, active, imperative verb. We are commanded to never give the devil any space, no foothold, to be perpetually vigilant so that our anger/wrath/rebellion will never give the devil an opportunity to bring division to the Body. How can both of these statements be true? They are, honestly, contradictory. The call to perpetual anger violate the Lord's teaching to love one another and even our enemies. Anger that controls us is virtually always destructive. What in the world does Paul mean for you and me? Does this verse really give me an out? Am I to be controlled by and express my anger? Am I actually be commanded by God to act this way?
Highly unlikely.
Passages like this are the reasons we need to understand that culture matters. We need to avoid the concept that Paul is writing to Americans with our narrow view that the universe and God revolve around us. We must remember that the Apostle Paul is a Jewish Rabbi writing to an assembly of Jews and Gentiles - a community where the Gentiles have become partakers of the Hebrew covenants and Promises. They are now a part of the commonwealth of Israel (See Ephesians 2:12). Everyone who first read this passage is thinking Hebrew not Greek or American. How does that help? Paul may be writing Greek but his thought process is Hebrew, as are all his readers. Ephesians 4:26 is drawn from Psalm 4. The original readers were well familiar with the Psalms and would have made the connection. The Jews recited the Psalms on a regular basis so they would have recognized where the phrase came from.
In the King James Version, Psalm 4:4 reads, "Stand in awe, and sin not, commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still." The NIV and NASB read "Tremble, and do not sin." The Hebrew word is ragaz. It means to tremble, to quiver, to quake, to be afraid, as in awe of God. In a secondary way it means to be perturbed, angry, or enraged. However, in the context of Psalm 4 the psalmist is calling the people to be right before God and each other. To stop going after false gods and to look to the Lord for peace and prosperity. In recognizing who the Lord is we should stand in awe. In knowing who God is, do not sin. Do not be in rebellion. When the sun sets, rest on your bed and search your own heart and be still. Do not be agitated or rebellious or distraught or perturbed with anyone.
In Ephesus, a community of followers of Messiah was meeting together. There were challenges as the Gentiles tried to assimilate into the Commonwealth of Israel. Tensions were, at times, pretty high. It was hard to be "One" with all their differences. Paul tells them to be honest with one another, remembering they are members of one another. How? Stand in awe of God. Accept the command to be continually passive or submitted to Him. And be careful to not sin against Him or each other. Do not let anything fester. Release it quickly and go to bed with the though of examining their own hearts. To be still and seek what the Lord would have for them. To do what must be none to promote and maintain the unity that comes from being members of one another. Never let those irritations fester. Never let the devil get a foothold. Don't steal from one another, rather be generous, don't speak evil but build up, never grieve the Holy Spirit, get rid of all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking, and malice. Instead, be kind to one another, tenderhearted, don't be perpetually angry but forgive one another as God, in Christ Jesus, has forgiven you" (Ephesians 4:28-32).
Which cultural context seems more likely to you? Our American tradition where we have a right to be angry, even commanded to always be angry. Or the Hebraic culture in which the letter was written? The one where we are to always to be in such awe of God that we will not sin or hold a grudge.
This is why I believe culture matters. This is why I believe we need to recognize that we were made a part of the Commonwealth of Israel, as the Apostle Paul tells us. We do have the option to deny our Hebraic roots and feel justified in being always, perpetually angry. Anger is easier than awe. Anger is easier than stand trembling before a holy God who calls me to never be angry but to forgive, just as He has forgiven me.
When we put Scripture into our own culture and ignore the one in which it was written it provides us with lots of options to get the Bible to say what we want. We get to ignore all the evidence that calls us to be accountable to the God of the Jews and make Him into the God with which we are comfortable. We get to justify those angry moments that damage others. Just so long as it isn't really sin. After all, they were the ones who, " made me angry. I was just standing there passively and the anger happened. And I am not sure, but I think I was just righteously indigent. So I am okay, Ephesians 4:26 tells me so."
That could be the message.
I, however, think it would be better to perpetually stand in awe of my God, the God of the Hebrews. From there, to do all I can to avoid sin while I forgive others.
How about you?
The word "anger" is the word orgizo in the Greek and it means to be angry, aroused to wrath, to be angry with someone, not something, whether it is an individual, a nation or Satan. It is a present, passive, imperative verb. Present means the activity is ongoing, something done perpetually. The passive voice tells us that it happens to us. We are passive so the anger rules over us not the other way around. Finally it is an imperative or a command.
Paul writes to the Ephesian Believers that they are commanded to be continually controlled by anger. Many commentaries fail to recognize the verb and give us the impression that we all occasionally "lose it" and that is okay. It is a common issue among humans. Or they go with the second option suggesting that we need "righteous indignation" when it comes to the deterioration of the world and the declining moral condition of society. To have righteous indignation against Satan and the sin that surrounds us. Just don't let this anger cross the line and become sin. A present, active, imperative verb.
Did you notice the change in voice? Anger is to control us but we are to be actively involved in not sinning. And, apparently, if we cross the line, we are not to let the sun go down on our wrath. Once again the word is a present, active, imperative verb. So we are commanded to always have an active role in getting rid of the "wrath" or parorgizo, meaning rage, anger, exasperation and, in a broader sense, rebellion. The Apostle Paul appears to be telling us that we are commanded to be perpetually controlled by anger toward someone, yet also commanded to be personally responsible to not sin or cross the line of disobedience to God's standards, and commanded to never let the day end with any rage, anger or rebellion present in our lives.
There are a few problems with all of this analysis. First, Ephesians 4:31 reads, "Let all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you, with all malice [emphasis mine]." This is likewise a command and the word "anger" is orge, the same root as orgizo back in verse 26. Thus, Paul tells us to be perpetually angry and never be angry in the same passage. The idea that this is all about "righteous indignation" does not fit the context.
The whole letter, and chapter 4 in particular, is about unity. Being "one". One body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all. As members of one another, we are to put away all lying, and speak the truth to his neighbor. There is nothing at all about the world or a "right" to be indignant toward the world or anyone else. As to the concept of being perpetually controlled by anger and never crossing the line to sin.......... well, good luck with that. Anger and rebellion go hand in hand and perpetually angry people seldom let go of their wrath before sundown. That situation leads to a violation of Ephesians 4:27, "nor give place to the devil".
Again, we find a present, active, imperative verb. We are commanded to never give the devil any space, no foothold, to be perpetually vigilant so that our anger/wrath/rebellion will never give the devil an opportunity to bring division to the Body. How can both of these statements be true? They are, honestly, contradictory. The call to perpetual anger violate the Lord's teaching to love one another and even our enemies. Anger that controls us is virtually always destructive. What in the world does Paul mean for you and me? Does this verse really give me an out? Am I to be controlled by and express my anger? Am I actually be commanded by God to act this way?
Highly unlikely.
Passages like this are the reasons we need to understand that culture matters. We need to avoid the concept that Paul is writing to Americans with our narrow view that the universe and God revolve around us. We must remember that the Apostle Paul is a Jewish Rabbi writing to an assembly of Jews and Gentiles - a community where the Gentiles have become partakers of the Hebrew covenants and Promises. They are now a part of the commonwealth of Israel (See Ephesians 2:12). Everyone who first read this passage is thinking Hebrew not Greek or American. How does that help? Paul may be writing Greek but his thought process is Hebrew, as are all his readers. Ephesians 4:26 is drawn from Psalm 4. The original readers were well familiar with the Psalms and would have made the connection. The Jews recited the Psalms on a regular basis so they would have recognized where the phrase came from.
In the King James Version, Psalm 4:4 reads, "Stand in awe, and sin not, commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still." The NIV and NASB read "Tremble, and do not sin." The Hebrew word is ragaz. It means to tremble, to quiver, to quake, to be afraid, as in awe of God. In a secondary way it means to be perturbed, angry, or enraged. However, in the context of Psalm 4 the psalmist is calling the people to be right before God and each other. To stop going after false gods and to look to the Lord for peace and prosperity. In recognizing who the Lord is we should stand in awe. In knowing who God is, do not sin. Do not be in rebellion. When the sun sets, rest on your bed and search your own heart and be still. Do not be agitated or rebellious or distraught or perturbed with anyone.
In Ephesus, a community of followers of Messiah was meeting together. There were challenges as the Gentiles tried to assimilate into the Commonwealth of Israel. Tensions were, at times, pretty high. It was hard to be "One" with all their differences. Paul tells them to be honest with one another, remembering they are members of one another. How? Stand in awe of God. Accept the command to be continually passive or submitted to Him. And be careful to not sin against Him or each other. Do not let anything fester. Release it quickly and go to bed with the though of examining their own hearts. To be still and seek what the Lord would have for them. To do what must be none to promote and maintain the unity that comes from being members of one another. Never let those irritations fester. Never let the devil get a foothold. Don't steal from one another, rather be generous, don't speak evil but build up, never grieve the Holy Spirit, get rid of all bitterness, wrath, anger, clamor, and evil speaking, and malice. Instead, be kind to one another, tenderhearted, don't be perpetually angry but forgive one another as God, in Christ Jesus, has forgiven you" (Ephesians 4:28-32).
Which cultural context seems more likely to you? Our American tradition where we have a right to be angry, even commanded to always be angry. Or the Hebraic culture in which the letter was written? The one where we are to always to be in such awe of God that we will not sin or hold a grudge.
This is why I believe culture matters. This is why I believe we need to recognize that we were made a part of the Commonwealth of Israel, as the Apostle Paul tells us. We do have the option to deny our Hebraic roots and feel justified in being always, perpetually angry. Anger is easier than awe. Anger is easier than stand trembling before a holy God who calls me to never be angry but to forgive, just as He has forgiven me.
When we put Scripture into our own culture and ignore the one in which it was written it provides us with lots of options to get the Bible to say what we want. We get to ignore all the evidence that calls us to be accountable to the God of the Jews and make Him into the God with which we are comfortable. We get to justify those angry moments that damage others. Just so long as it isn't really sin. After all, they were the ones who, " made me angry. I was just standing there passively and the anger happened. And I am not sure, but I think I was just righteously indigent. So I am okay, Ephesians 4:26 tells me so."
That could be the message.
I, however, think it would be better to perpetually stand in awe of my God, the God of the Hebrews. From there, to do all I can to avoid sin while I forgive others.
How about you?
Tuesday, December 8, 2015
Do You Really Want Fellowship With Jesus? It is more Costly Than We Think.
Fellowship with Jesus. Oh, yes, that is our desire. Or many of us would say. To have Him close enough to be a friend. Someone there to council and console me when the days are hard and dreary. I also need to toss in forgiveness and graciousness toward me, for I am frail and prone to wander. Fellowship with the Messiah is a nice thing, at least if we can have it on our terms. Close enough to know He is always there but not so close that it might change me or cost me something. Sort of "Fellowship Light" where I feel loved and protected with little obligation. However, I do not think that God sees it that way. Paul shares His desire for Christ in Philippians 3:10,"That I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and in the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death." It is a remarkable request coming from the man who has walked with the Lord for many years. From one who writes from prison due to his ministry for the Lord. "That I may know Him" should be the passion each of us feels who claim to follow Messiah. So, let's take a minute or two and see what Paul meant. Let us see what it really means to be in fellowship with Jesus.
We will need to take a closer look at each of the key words for our English language has a few short comings as we consider the verse. Paul wants to "know" Messiah. The Greek word is ginosko and the translation is accurate as it means to know. However, the Greek has another word, oida, that is also translated "to know". The difference is in the type of knowing. In Philippians 1:25 Paul says, "and I know (oida) that I shall remain". The difference is cognitive and relational. I know (oida) how to get to Erie and I know (ginosko) my wife are two different types of knowing. The Greek language helps us out by giving us these two words. Paul does not want to just know about Christ but to know Him relationally. To have an intimacy with his Savior.
Lots of people know (oida) about Christ but do not really know (ginosko) Him. This type of knowing is actually pretty hard to find and even harder to maintain. It demands transparency and vulnerability. We must have the confidence to share our deepest thoughts, dreams, and failures with someone, knowing they will still be there, perhaps at an even deeper level than before. That is why it is still a prayer of Paul even after all these years. To have a growing intimacy with the Lord and shepherd of my soul takes work and an emotional sacrifice that few are willing to offer. However, without it there is no real fellowship.
Paul goes on to tell us he desires to know the "power of His [Christ's] resurrection". This experiential, relational knowledge of the power, the dunamis, of His resurrection. This Greek word speaks of the sustaining, unrelenting, power of God. It is not the explosive dynamite blast we might see in moving mountains. It is the sustaining power of an uninterrupted electric current, only magnified by the very power of God. This unrelenting power is found in the resurrection, in our Lord's victory over death. It is the life of God in Christ Jesus imparted to me so that I might have life. This power of life does not ebb and flow but sustains me for all eternity. It is the breaking of the curse of death and the gift of life everlasting.
The question is, "What will I do with this life now offered to me?" "How will I live this life, in light of the desire I have to know Him?" It is by the power of the resurrection that I may now have fellowship with Him. Not just a sort of nebulous fluffy relationship but one of depth and meaning that comes from the passion and power to know Him more intimately each day. Looking forward, knowing that, "For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known" (1 Cor 13:12). Oh, to know him and the power of His resurrection. So far, so good, but now Paul tells us that there is more. More to really knowing Messiah in that intimate, life changing way.
"And the fellowship of His sufferings." SUFFERINGS! What kind of prayer is that? Who asks for sufferings? Before you get too freaked out let us take a look at the words Paul chooses to use. Fellowship, koininia, One of those words you may have heard before. It is a popular word used by the apostle John. It means, association, community, joint participation, fellowship, intimacy, sharing the same goals and passion, being unified with one goal and objective. The word for sufferings just means suffering or affliction. We are to join in the sufferings of Christ.
Here is where we need to make sure we do not lose the contest. What this does not mean is being made fun of because you have a fish on the back of your car. It does not mean being teased or rebuked for your stand on moral issues. It does not necessarily mean being beaten and imprisoned for your faith. It is not about discomfort as much as it is in "knowing". Remember, that is where Paul started. To know the sufferings of Christ is to enter into His passion, His reason for suffering. It is a relational knowing that is related to the purpose of the Lord's suffering. It was to bring life to those who needed life. It was to break the power of sin and death. It was to sacrifice His life for the benefit of others, for those He loved and who were in desperate need of deliverance. Paul's desire was to have the same intimate passion and willingness to sacrifice to bring the message of life to others. To relationally, emotionally, practically connect with Christ's desire for others to have life.
"Being conformed to His death" is not another prayer to "know" but an explanation of the fellowship of His sufferings. It carries the idea of being willing to sacrifice everything for the Kingdom. It is a recognition that I am not my own. It is the cry of our Savior when, "He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done" (Matt 26:42). "Thy will be done." To be in Fellowship with Jesus is to carry the same motivation of personal sacrifice to see others have life. To be willing to put others first in the Body so the world will see our love for one another, to see our good work and glorify our Father in heaven (Matt 5:16).
Do we really want that kind of fellowship? Paul is writing to an assembly of believers who struggle to get along. To a group who need to catch the reality of this kind of sacrificial fellowship with one another and then the world. It is not a comfortable or safe kind of "knowing" or "fellowship". It is not the kind we practice very well. Are you willing to sacrifice part of your retirement savings to help an unemployed brother pay his mortgage? Sacrifice your child's college fund to help pay for another child's cancer treatments? Give up your cruise or vacation to put a roof on someones home? Can we be like those in Acts 4? "Neither was there any need among them that lacked for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and brought the prices of the things that sold, and laid them down at the apostles feet and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need." (note, this is not a passage promoting Communism. They, of their own free will, chose to sell their excess and support the community of believers) For many of us the attitude is more like this: "Well, I will pray, and I will encourage and give them a copy of the "help wanted" ads."
Do we really want to know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His suffering? Do we want to be conformed to His death? Or do we abridge the cry of Jesus and just say, "Let my will be done".
Fellowship with Jesus. Is it more costly than you thought? Is it worth the price to know Him? It was for the Apostle Paul. It ought to be for me. What about you?
We will need to take a closer look at each of the key words for our English language has a few short comings as we consider the verse. Paul wants to "know" Messiah. The Greek word is ginosko and the translation is accurate as it means to know. However, the Greek has another word, oida, that is also translated "to know". The difference is in the type of knowing. In Philippians 1:25 Paul says, "and I know (oida) that I shall remain". The difference is cognitive and relational. I know (oida) how to get to Erie and I know (ginosko) my wife are two different types of knowing. The Greek language helps us out by giving us these two words. Paul does not want to just know about Christ but to know Him relationally. To have an intimacy with his Savior.
Lots of people know (oida) about Christ but do not really know (ginosko) Him. This type of knowing is actually pretty hard to find and even harder to maintain. It demands transparency and vulnerability. We must have the confidence to share our deepest thoughts, dreams, and failures with someone, knowing they will still be there, perhaps at an even deeper level than before. That is why it is still a prayer of Paul even after all these years. To have a growing intimacy with the Lord and shepherd of my soul takes work and an emotional sacrifice that few are willing to offer. However, without it there is no real fellowship.
Paul goes on to tell us he desires to know the "power of His [Christ's] resurrection". This experiential, relational knowledge of the power, the dunamis, of His resurrection. This Greek word speaks of the sustaining, unrelenting, power of God. It is not the explosive dynamite blast we might see in moving mountains. It is the sustaining power of an uninterrupted electric current, only magnified by the very power of God. This unrelenting power is found in the resurrection, in our Lord's victory over death. It is the life of God in Christ Jesus imparted to me so that I might have life. This power of life does not ebb and flow but sustains me for all eternity. It is the breaking of the curse of death and the gift of life everlasting.
The question is, "What will I do with this life now offered to me?" "How will I live this life, in light of the desire I have to know Him?" It is by the power of the resurrection that I may now have fellowship with Him. Not just a sort of nebulous fluffy relationship but one of depth and meaning that comes from the passion and power to know Him more intimately each day. Looking forward, knowing that, "For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known" (1 Cor 13:12). Oh, to know him and the power of His resurrection. So far, so good, but now Paul tells us that there is more. More to really knowing Messiah in that intimate, life changing way.
"And the fellowship of His sufferings." SUFFERINGS! What kind of prayer is that? Who asks for sufferings? Before you get too freaked out let us take a look at the words Paul chooses to use. Fellowship, koininia, One of those words you may have heard before. It is a popular word used by the apostle John. It means, association, community, joint participation, fellowship, intimacy, sharing the same goals and passion, being unified with one goal and objective. The word for sufferings just means suffering or affliction. We are to join in the sufferings of Christ.
Here is where we need to make sure we do not lose the contest. What this does not mean is being made fun of because you have a fish on the back of your car. It does not mean being teased or rebuked for your stand on moral issues. It does not necessarily mean being beaten and imprisoned for your faith. It is not about discomfort as much as it is in "knowing". Remember, that is where Paul started. To know the sufferings of Christ is to enter into His passion, His reason for suffering. It is a relational knowing that is related to the purpose of the Lord's suffering. It was to bring life to those who needed life. It was to break the power of sin and death. It was to sacrifice His life for the benefit of others, for those He loved and who were in desperate need of deliverance. Paul's desire was to have the same intimate passion and willingness to sacrifice to bring the message of life to others. To relationally, emotionally, practically connect with Christ's desire for others to have life.
"Being conformed to His death" is not another prayer to "know" but an explanation of the fellowship of His sufferings. It carries the idea of being willing to sacrifice everything for the Kingdom. It is a recognition that I am not my own. It is the cry of our Savior when, "He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done" (Matt 26:42). "Thy will be done." To be in Fellowship with Jesus is to carry the same motivation of personal sacrifice to see others have life. To be willing to put others first in the Body so the world will see our love for one another, to see our good work and glorify our Father in heaven (Matt 5:16).
Do we really want that kind of fellowship? Paul is writing to an assembly of believers who struggle to get along. To a group who need to catch the reality of this kind of sacrificial fellowship with one another and then the world. It is not a comfortable or safe kind of "knowing" or "fellowship". It is not the kind we practice very well. Are you willing to sacrifice part of your retirement savings to help an unemployed brother pay his mortgage? Sacrifice your child's college fund to help pay for another child's cancer treatments? Give up your cruise or vacation to put a roof on someones home? Can we be like those in Acts 4? "Neither was there any need among them that lacked for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and brought the prices of the things that sold, and laid them down at the apostles feet and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need." (note, this is not a passage promoting Communism. They, of their own free will, chose to sell their excess and support the community of believers) For many of us the attitude is more like this: "Well, I will pray, and I will encourage and give them a copy of the "help wanted" ads."
Do we really want to know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His suffering? Do we want to be conformed to His death? Or do we abridge the cry of Jesus and just say, "Let my will be done".
Fellowship with Jesus. Is it more costly than you thought? Is it worth the price to know Him? It was for the Apostle Paul. It ought to be for me. What about you?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)