Boiling it down. 1 John 2.

We've read a lot of Scripture this year. I've written a few words about it. We've had lessons from Paul, from the actions of those in the early church, and from those who walked with Jesus, as recorded in the gospels. John, himself, has given us a lot to chew on in this chapter alone.

But as Christians it pretty much comes down to this:

"The one who says he resides in God ought himself to walk just as Jesus walked." (V.2:6)

Not that it's simple to do. To walk so close to and so much like Jesus means we have to know what He knew. We have to do what He did. He knew the text. He knew the Father. He spoke with authority. He submitted to the Father's authority. He treated all as His neighbor.

To walk as Jesus walked means we need the lessons of Paul, the example of Peter, the song of Mary. We need to spend as much time with Him as we can, through the written word, in communion with His Spirit, talking to Him, and then listening. We need to know His life as if we had been one of the disciples walking with Him, breathing in the dust of His steps.

All this takes time, and discipline, and friends, and brothers and sisters.

But it is easy to state -- today, Lord, help me to walk just as You walked.

Amen.

Rasslin' the prologue. 1 John 1.

Before Steve Austin, before The Rock, before Hulk Hogan, and even before promoter extraordinaire Vince McMahon came on the scene, turning professional wrestling into a half a billion dollar a year business traded on the New York Stock Exchange, there was ... classy Freddie Blassie.

Classy Freddie Blassie

I'm pretty sure that most of you reading this aren't wrestling fans (I'm not either), and I'd really be surprised if any of you had heard of Freddie Blassie or his trademark insult slogan - "You pencil necked geek!" but in the 50s and 60s he was the quintessential villain in the wrestling ring, and perhaps the first wrestling superstar. As a kid growing up, I loved "hating" him.

His arch-nemesis was "The Destroyer", whose gimmick was a mask that kept him unknown, and everyone tried, unsuccessfully, to remove from his head.

The Destroyer

He was my favorite wrestler, and his signature move was the "figure-four leg lock." If he got his opponent in that position, the match was over. It was a convoluted move, and the only way The Destroyer could actually use it was when the narrative of the match reached a climax and his opponent was so fatigued he couldn't stop it.

For some odd reason, I kept thinking about these guys as I wrestled with the prologue in this first letter from John. The English is difficult. The Greek, apparently, equally so. Is it possible to unmask the message lying under the language? Or will I end up in a figure-four leg lock of language? And how about you?

How to start? One of our helps as non-Greek speaking readers is the availability of multiple translations. The StudyLight website, www.studylight.org, is really helpful for doing this. When you first get to the site, be sure to set your preferences for which translation you want as your main reading choice, and at the bottom of the preferences page, you can choose which translations to show in the multi-translation window. After setting your preferences you can enter the passage to read, and click Search. The page you see will have the passage in your preferred translation. For each verse, there are text links to read the verse in context, in Greek, and a few other choices. The Multi-Translation link is the one to use for displaying parallel translations of the verses. You have to click through the verses one at a time, but it works.

So I cranked up StudyLight, and read from 3 parallels plus my standard: the NASB, the NIV, the NLT, and J. P. Green's Literal translation. Then I took a look at the interlinear to get even closer to the Greek words themselves. What you find when you do this kind of work, is that there are a lot of words added and removed for clarity's sake in a translation. In the NET Bible (not on StudyLight), verse 1 begins "This is what we proclaim to you..." which parallels what the NIV puts at the end of the first verse: "this we proclaim...". The NET Bible has these great footnotes that help one understand what's going on, that this phrase is inserted to make the English read more clearly. Its location in the NIV is more confusing than helpful to me, but the footnote in the NET, stating that the subject-predicate of the sentence is in verse 3 -- "we announce" -- was something I had discovered on my own from the literal translation. (And I'm glad to have that confirmation.)

The proclaim/announce verb was really important in helping me break this apart. As I read through the passage several times, trying to discover where the sentence began (and at this point I was not using NIV or NET, but the NASB and the Green Literal, that word kept popping up. Proclaim ... proclaim ... proclaim ... even an inserted phrase not in the Greek. I could picture heralds marching into a town, "hear ye, hear ye, hear ye." (Admittedly my picture is medieval and not 1st century, but still the same concept.) The heralds enter, and shout out, "What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld, and what our hands touched ..." That made sense to me.

Official herald of the New
Testament Read Through blog.

It's as if these were the answers to the question, "what have the heralds come to proclaim?"

This realization opened the first few verses for me, but it was coupled by a second observation, also of repetition. Whatever is being proclaimed, whatever it is John wants to talk about, it is for the sake of fellowship, used 4 times within 5 verses.

With those two observations in mind, and ignoring all other translations which may say what I'm going to say, here's the Green Literal translation, and the hook explication. (I don't expect this to be completely right, but I want you to see the process. The experts who have created the major translations are much better at this. But you should know that you can do this, too. And then you can go back and compare against the various translations.)

What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld, and what our hands touched, as regards the Word of Life. 2 And the Life was revealed, and we have seen, and we bear witness, and we announce to you the everlasting Life which was with the Father, and was revealed to us. 3 We announce to you what we have seen, and what we have heard, that you also may have fellowship with us. And truly our fellowship is with the Father and with His Son, Jesus Christ. 4 And we write these things to you, that your joy may be full.

5 And this is the message which we have heard from Him, and we proclaim to you: God is light, and no darkness is in Him, none! 6 If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and we walk in darkness, we lie and are not practicing the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of His Son Jesus Christ cleanses us from all sin." (1 John 1:1-8 J.P. Green's Literal Translation)

I'm only going to deal with the first four verses, usually labeled the prologue in most outlines, but I've provided the next four verses for some context. Here we go.

Start with verse three. Treat verses 1 and 2 as the blare of trumpets making certain we're listening. The words are important, but we'll get back to them. We have, then, a perfectly obvious declarative sentence, written by John using the royal we, or else writing on behalf of himself and the believers with him. "We announce to you what we have seen, and what we have heard, that you also may have fellowship with us." John is providing testimony to a reality he has experienced, and it's important that those who receive this message understand the reality -- seen and heard, not imagined. Those who do, enter into fellowship with the other believers, a fellowship with God, Father and Son. In verse 4, some manuscripts read "our joy" and some "your joy". Either way, the point is that everyone's joy increases as John shares his message and the fellowship is increased.

If you were reading the last paragraph carefully, you may have noticed the phrase "a reality he [John] has experienced." What was that reality? Well, that's the point of the music in verse 1, and the parenthetic statement of proclamation in verse 2. The music sings, "it's about this, it's about the Word of Life, that which was from the beginning, that which was real, we saw it, felt it, heard it, listen again, it was everlasting life made manifest, revealed to us, the everlasting Life that was with the Father." Jesus was real, John lived with him, and learned from him, and through him was revealed the eternal life of the Father.

The basis of the fellowship, then, is the reality of Jesus. That's the prologue. John then describes the measure of fellowship -- walking in light. The message he heard was that God is only light, and so fellowship with Him could only be in light. Well... that's the start of the rest of the story, but I've finished rasslin'. I hear the message of the heralds. I'm especially grateful for the promise of eternal life in the light. Even the greatest of athletes get old. And then it doesn't hurt to have a mask as your schtick.

Freddie Blassie and The Destroyer at an awards banquet,
later in life.

A final trustworthy saying. Titus 3.

This is a trustworthy saying, and I want you to insist on these teachings so that all who trust in God will devote themselves to doing good. These teachings are good and beneficial for everyone. (Titus 3:8 NLT)

I'll get to the actual trustworthy saying that Paul is referring to in a minute, but first, it's time to say goodbye to Paul in our reading for a while. We still have two of his letters to read before the end of the year, but they don't contain any identified trustworthy sayings. As noted earlier, the presence of these sayings is a reflection on the maturing of the various churches, adding embodied truth in the form of memorized and repeated sayings.

Even as Paul says that he's given Titus a trustworthy saying, he adds his own trustworthy saying. Titus was to teach the church at Crete what the apostles had taught, teach what was embodied in the trustworthy saying. The result of that teaching would lead any who trust in God to devote themselves to doing good works. Our trust in God's work on the cross is the starting point of doing good, not the end point. While some of the teachings in this letter are rooted in the situation in Crete, this isn't. We don't have to take an extra step to extract principles for us from the prescription for the initial recipients of the letter.

But—“When God our Savior revealed his kindness and love, he saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He washed away our sins, giving us a new birth and new life through the Holy Spirit. He generously poured out the Spirit upon us through Jesus Christ our Savior. Because of his grace he declared us righteous and gave us confidence that we will inherit eternal life.” (Titus 3:4-7 NLT)

And there you have it. God did all the work, in kindness and love, not because of what we had done. We're made new, anointed with His Spirit, and declared righteous. And it's that truth that leads us to devote ourselves to doing good. Can there be any doubt? If we really believe this, if we grow in our understanding of what it means, if we see more and more clearly what it means to be eternally in God's presence, how can we possibly do less than be devoted to doing good?

Paul can remind us (and Titus) of this, but it's our choice to absorb the lesson. It helps to remember the story of Jesus, and we get one more reading of that, yet this year. And it helps to have trustworthy sayings in our memory, ready to call up at any moment to chew on, meditate over, and remind us that it really is all about Him.

Self-control. Titus 2.

Was there any choice on what to blog about for this chapter?

At then end of the first chapter of Titus (keeping in mind that this was just the previous sentence of Paul's letter), Paul wrote, "They profess to know God but with their deeds they deny him, since they are detestable, disobedient, and unfit for any good deed." (Titus 1:16 NET) Paul continues that thought by saying to Titus in v.2:1, "But as for you, communicate the behavior that goes with sound teaching."

As Paul gave Titus the instruction to complete the task of putting things in order in the church in Crete (v.1:5), a part of that task was to stand firm against the false teachers (v.1:11). And that meant providing teaching that led to proper behavior and good works. Paul gives Titus specific instructions for older men, older women, younger women and men, and bondservants (slaves). And one of the chief characteristics to be taught is that of self-control -- given to older men, younger men, and through the older women to the young women. It's not too much to assume Paul meant it for everyone.

There are several Greek words that are translated as self-control. The two words we're concerned with are: egkrateia and sophron. Both these words occur in Titus 1:8, but only the latter, sophron, is used in Titus 2. The NIV translators chose to translate sophron as self-controlled, so in Titus 1:8 they translate egkrateia as "disciplined". Unfortunately, this is not the same translation they used in Galatians 5:23, where self-control (egkrateia) is listed as a fruit of the spirit. The NET Bible is more consistent, but using the English word "sensible" instead of self-control for the Greek word, sophron throughout the letter to Titus. This leaves the translators free to use "self-control" for egkrateia in Titus 1:8. Here's a chart to sort it all out.

Greek Word	sophron	egkrates/egkrateia
Definition	- sensible, self-controlled; chaste, modest (of women). - pertaining to being sensible and moderate in one's behavior.	- to exercise complete control over one's desires and actions. - self-controlled; pertaining to exercising self-control.
NET Bible	sensible	self-controlled
NIV Gal. 5:23		self-controlled
NIV Titus 1:8	self-controlled	disciplined
NIV Titus 2	self-controlled

Now why all this potential confusion? In part it has to do with closeness of the meanings between the words self-control and sensible. Louw and Nida, whose lexicon contains the longish definitions you've read as the last definitions for each "Word of the Day" on the blog, divide the Koine Greek language into "semantic domains." These domains are a way of classifying various words in a language into a meaningful hierarchy. The concept comes from an understanding about the way we tend to think in and learn a language by those who study semantics. Thus, there are domains for plants, and one for animals that we pretty quickly learn to differentiate between. (And so, Gallagher can make jokes about a sledge hammer as a kitchen device, the "Sledge-o-Matic.")

Louw and Nida classify sensible and self-control as adjacent domains, signifying the very close relationship between the words. Take a look at the chart above for the definitions. The difference between the Greek words is subtle, but may be worth singling out. In the case of egkrateia (Titus 1:8 and Galatians 5:23), there is the idea disciplining oneself (exerting power), like a runner training for a marathon getting up every morning to run. In the Titus 2 passage, the idea to be taught is that of sensible living, modesty in behavior, and the thoughtful awareness that leads to living that way.

Both ideas are implicit in who we are to be and how we are to act as Christians. For this day, then, where are the places where my living is less than sensible and lacking self-control? God help me in those areas, that my life might be a better reflection of who You are.

Appointed season. Titus 1.

In 2 Timothy we looked at the timing of the "last days." In his letter to Titus, Paul talks about the timing of God, in the sense of events taking place at an appropriate moment, chosen by God. The NET Bible translation says, simply, "But in his own time ..." (Titus 1:3a) The NIV puts it more elegantly:

"... a faith and knowledge resting on the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time, and at his appointed season he brought his word to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Saviour ..." (Titus 1:2,3 NIV)

(A side note on the translations. As the NET Bible footnote indicates, in the Greek there is a strong contrast between v.1:2b and v.1:3a, which they emphasize with the word "But". The NIV uses "and", which makes a connection, but doesn't emphasize the contrast. The new version of the NIV, Today's New International Version, or TNIV, keeps the phrase "appropriate season", but adds the contrast in this way: "and which now ..." For those of you unfamiliar with it, this updated version (TNIV) of the NIV has much to commend it.)

The two thoughts Paul is expressing are that first of all, God has made decisions and extended promises before the dawn of time; and second, that it's His choice as to when those decisions come to fruition or when He fulfills His promises. The implication is that in both cases, it's His choice to make, and it will be good.

The best example I can think of is the same one Paul is talking about -- God's promise of eternal life was fulfilled in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. There was no more fortuitous time for Jesus' entry into the world, than at the moment He did come. The Greek civilization had provided a common language. The Roman Empire had provided peace (enforced militarily), common economics, and a tremendous infrastructure (especially their roads). The message of the kingdom of God at hand could be taken throughout the civilized western world, and was. Even Paul's background -- trained Jewish scholar and Roman citizen -- enabled him to uniquely help in the spread of the gospel.

At the appointed season.

And for each of us, we can put our confidence in the God who does not lie, even when we're waiting for that appointed season. From Jesus' text:

He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the human heart; yet no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end. (Ecclesiastes 3:11 TNIV)

This verse, is the conclusion of the passage which begins, "To everything there is a season" and expresses a godly perspective on the passage.



And on that note, I'll end. Boy do I feel old.

Deliverance. 2 Timothy 4.

The Post that Ate Manhattan.
This post has taken over a week to finally finish. And you can't really even tell.

But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me, so that through me the message would be fully proclaimed for all the Gentiles to hear. And so I was delivered from the lion’s mouth! The Lord will deliver me from every evil deed and will bring me safely into his heavenly kingdom. (2 Timothy 4:16-17 NET)

At first glance, those words sound encouraging about Paul's personal fate. He was delivered before. He'll be delivered again. Oh wait... "safely into his heavenly kingdom." Which was indeed the case. We have no further letters from Paul. The cavalry didn't come to the rescue, and tradition has it that not too long after this letter was written, Paul was executed, most likely beheaded as befitted a Roman citizen, during the persecution of Nero.

For some, this may not sound like much of a deliverance, but for those who deal with pain and suffering every moment, every day, and for those who have a clear vision of what it will mean to be with the Lord forever, this is total deliverance. Paul wrote to the Philippians during his first imprisonment:

"For to me, living is Christ and dying is gain. Now if I am to go on living in the body, this will mean productive work for me, yet I don’t know which I prefer: I feel torn between the two, because I have a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far, but it is more vital for your sake that I remain in the body." (Philippians 1:21-24 NET)

The concepts in the words: saving, salvation, rescue, and deliverance, are all tied together. This connection is a natural one to make before you enter the vocabulary world of Christian-ese. As Christians, though, we tend to separate out "salvation" from the other words. This too is somewhat natural, because the definition of the word has been expanded to incorporate a larger concept than deliverance. (Although deliverance would be perfectly acceptable as a meaningful description of what happens to us through Christ.)

I want to take a quick look at these words as a way to cap our read through 2 Timothy. In the Greek, there are two words that can be translated into English as deliver, delivered, deliverance, or salvation and saved, when used in the sense of rescue. (There are a couple others that have to do with handing over, as in Luke 24:7 -- "The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men.") The two words are:

rhuomai - to draw to oneself, i.e. deliver; to rescue from danger, with the implication that the danger in question is severe and acute.

soteria - deliverance, salvation; salvation (in the Christian sense); preservation, release; to rescue from danger and to restore to a former state of safety and well being; a state of having been saved; the process of being saved.

Rhuomai is the word Paul uses here. In other words, he's talking about getting rescued from execution and released from prison.

But take a look at those definitions for soteria. There is also a sense of rescue from danger implicit in this word we translate as salvation. This is an important idea in Hebrew thought. Salvation for the Jews carried with it this idea of deliverance or rescue. It was applied more often to physical rescue from the clutches of an enemy than to the idea of going to heaven. The ultimate salvation for the Jews was simply to "be God's covenant people." The understanding was that, "Salvation, then, means deliverance from all that interferes with the enjoyment of these blessings. So it takes countless forms—deliverance from natural plagues, from internal dissensions, from external enemies, or from the subjugation of conquerors (the exile, particularly)."¹ The blessings referred to included a long and prosperous life in Palestine, the happiness of knowing God, a new heaven and new earth, and the resurrection of the dead (Is. 26:19).

And so it is that Paul can say, even as he considers his life poured out in offering, "The Lord will deliver me from every evil deed and will bring me safely into his heavenly kingdom."

¹The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, James Orr, M.A., D.D., General Editor

Timing. 2 Timothy 3.

Paul makes an interesting statement in verse 1 of this chapter. "But understand this, that in the last days difficult times will come." That statement is followed by a long list the ways in which the unrighteous will act, and make things difficult. It's not uncommon for Christians today to point to a list like this one (and a couple others in the New Testament), and say, "Aha! Look! We're in the last days." And they're right, but not because these behaviors are now being demonstrated. Paul was talking to Timothy about what he would experience, calling it "the last days."

Apparently, the last days began back then and continue to today. This is something we need to incorporate into our thinking. If we're in the last days, then Christ could come at any time. This is true, but it has been true for nearly 2,000 years. It's the tension we're intended to live in. Jesus said, in the midst of telling a couple of parables about expectant living, "Therefore stay alert, because you do not know the day or the hour." (Matthew 25:13)

The point here is that we are to live in expectation of His return, and that expectant living looks a certain way. In His parables, Jesus paints a picture of what that looks like -- on the lookout, ready to "wait the night", and using the gifts, talents, and assets we have been given to further the Kingdom. Paul gives advice to Timothy to:

• avoid the evil ones (in the sense of entanglement, not gentle teaching)
• to continue following Paul's teaching, practice, purposes, patience, endurance, and love
• expect things to get worse, but to endure
• remember the Scriptures, which he had known since a youth, which are inspired and ... well, you know the rest, and I'll quote it in a minute

Paul's advice to Timothy includes an exhortation to adhere to the teaching of the text. It's a biggie in the pantheon of "what we believe," and how we should handle the text. Here it is.

Every scripture is inspired by God and useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the person dedicated to God may be capable and equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16,17 NET)

While the emphasis in looking at these verses is usually either on the inspiration of Scripture (God's breathing into the text), or on the 4 ways it is useful, I'd like to point out today that the goal of God in giving us this instruction is that we might be equipped to do good works. Study without action is pointless. And in context, Paul is telling Timothy to continue to soldier on in the face of the hardships he will face in these last days, by relying on the text. For Timothy, that was the Old Testament, not the New. We understand that Paul's principles apply to the New Testament, but for Timothy only the Old was available. Ultimately, all of us doing the NT Read Through this year, will need to spend time in the Old Testament as well. Stay tuned.

Whether we're really, really close to Jesus' return, I can't say. Admittedly, I tend to dismiss that aspect that people often mean when they say, "We're in the last days." It's sufficient for me to know that we are in the last days, and we wait on God's timing. In expectation.

Think. 2 Timothy 2.

This is a rich chapter, full of advice. I have read that pastors would do well to read this chapter every day. It was verse 2:7 that captured my attention this day:

"Think about what I am saying and the Lord will give you understanding of all this."

So I did. Here are the verses I thought about:

Make every effort to present yourself before God as a proven worker who does not need to be ashamed, teaching the message of truth accurately. (2 Timothy 2:15 NET)

Now in a wealthy home there are not only gold and silver vessels, but also ones made of wood and of clay, and some are for honorable use, but others for ignoble use. So if someone cleanses himself of such behavior, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart, useful for the Master, prepared for every good work. (2 Timothy 2:20,21 NET)

How about you?

Do you need some inspiration?



Maybe not.

All kidding aside (and I hope you enjoyed the video), this is a tremendous lesson from Paul. God will open up His Word to new levels of understanding if we take the time to think.

Gratuitous Pirate Post.

For all of ye who might be yarnin' for the wind in the sails and the spray on yer faces. For all of ye with a rogues' streak runnin' below decks, sweet as it may be. For any of ye lads and lassies wit' a hint o' the South Seas n'ar a divilish glint in the eye. This be yer post. Take care in said comments.

- hook

THE PIRATES. Drawn by M. Biard. Harper's Weekly, July 20, 1861.

Honor and shame. 2 Timothy 1.

Paul uses the word ashamed (Greek epaischunomai) three times in this first chapter of his final letter to Timothy. That sounds like a clue to something important. Looking quickly at the usage in question ...

For God did not give us a Spirit of fear but of power and love and self-control. So do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me, a prisoner for his sake, but by God’s power accept your share of suffering for the gospel. (2 Timothy 1:7,8 NET)

Because of this, in fact, I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, because I know the one in whom my faith is set ... (2 Timothy 1:12 NET)

May the Lord grant mercy to the family of Onesiphorus, because he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my imprisonment. (2 Timothy 1:16 NET)

... it seems pretty obvious that the shame Paul didn't have was attached to suffering and imprisonment.

In some ways this is a familiar concept, but in some ways not so much. For example, we attach a certain amount of shame to the idea of imprisonment, although it's probably attached more to the reason for the imprisonment than the imprisonment itself. For Martin Luther King Jr. to be arrested for non-violent (even illegal) protests to discriminatory law is not the same as the arrest of Mel Gibson for drunk driving and resisting arrest while hurling anti-Semitic epithets. Likewise, we're aware that for some people suffering (say poverty), and illness feel shameful. We hear that sentiment expressed in phrases like, "I'd be too ashamed to ask for help."

But this seems to go deeper in Paul's case than in that of our own culture. As Paul is encouraging Timothy to not be ashamed, he ties that shame to Timothy's testimony about Paul (in prison) and the Lord (). What goes in those parentheses? Crucified. Timothy's testimony is the gospel of a crucified Messiah as given to him by Paul, the guy in jail about to be executed. And Timothy can expect to suffer as well!

Well, that's just ugly. The words of the old hymn, The Old Rugged Cross, come to mind.

On a hill far away stood an old rugged cross,
the emblem of suffering and shame.

Crucifixion was horrific in every possible way. Painful beyond measure. Lengthy. Public. Defenselessly naked. Death coming when the balance between enduring the pain required to keep breathing shifted in favor of the fear that came with asphyxiation. The shame of criminality.

The Three Crosses, etching by Rembrandt, 1653, State III of IV

The gospel is about a Messiah who was crucified. For Jews, in general, and for Paul specifically, until he met the risen Lord, this is an incomprehensible thought. It was just as true for the rest of the cultures in Paul's world. Criminal death, even as a martyr, was only shameful. Paul had to wrap his head around this unthinkable thought. And he did. In fact, he saw incomprehensible beauty and love and power in the justness and mercy of this act -- "To me – less than the least of all the saints – this grace was given, to proclaim to the Gentiles the unfathomable riches of Christ ..." (Eph. 3:8 NET)

No doubt it took continual reminders that Christ's death and the suffering of the saints were not shameful events, but necessary ones, to counteract the influence of the culture's thinking. It's on that note, that I want to flesh out something beyond what we gain straight from the Bible (although given enough time, I bet the information is there for as much as we need to know. See, for example, the numerous references to shame in the Psalms, and David's prefiguring of Paul's sentiment when he says in Psalm 69:7 "For I suffer humiliation for your sake and am thoroughly disgraced.")

While I try to get the sense of what I'm reading each day in our NT Read Through directly from the text, I knew that I wasn't fully comprehending this idea of shame. So I spent a little time looking into it using other resources. We live in a culture where honor and shame as motivators for behavior are codified into law. In Paul's day, honor and shame were more directly connected to behavior and status. Apparently there is a great deal of cultural anthropological thought related to "honor-shame" cultures. We don't need to get into that to get the essential message of Paul's words to Timothy, and God's words to us, but I'll leave you with a short quote, not from a cultural anthropology source, but from Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible.

Honor, Shame
Among North Americans, honor and shame often refer to a psychological state -- a person's internal moral character or the actions that reflect that character. In the world of the Bible and in traditional Mediterranean societies, however, honor and shame are social values determinative of a person's identity and social status. Honor is a person's claim to self-worth and the social acknowledgment of that claim -- i.e., honor is a person's public reputation which constitutes his or her identity. Shame is a person's concern for reputation. It is a positive value by which one seeks to protect his or her honor. If one is unable to maintain his honor, or if his peers do not acknowledge his claim to self-worth, then the person is shamed, i.e., dishonored and disgraced. A person with no concern for his honor or reputation is shameless.¹

Even in this, Jesus turns the world order upside down -- suffering that was shameful becomes when done for others, honor.

¹Eerdman's Dictionary of the Bible

Creeds and formulations. 1 Timothy 6.

In this last chapter of Timothy, it's hard to overlook the several formulations Paul uses in the letter. By formulation, I mean what appears to be a saying that was memorized and repeated by those in the church, like we might repeat "The Lord's Prayer." These formulations are reminders that this letter was written at the end of Paul's ministry, when the churches had been in place for a while and were developing routine and liturgy and structure.

Sometimes we react against the idea of structure, but it's essential to everything. God took the void and gave it structure. The church in Acts 2 was just a beginning. In the process of maturing, the realization came that hanging out together all the time was impractical. Worship could take place while working, even in how you did your work. A regular first day of the week gathering became the norm. Jesus' command was to go into all the world and make disciples and most observers think that God used the persecution of the Jerusalem church to help make that happen.

This letter to Timothy is all about church structure, leadership, and practice, especially for Timothy's instruction as he acts as Paul's successor. And sprinkled within the letter is this phrase, "This saying is trustworthy and deserves full acceptance..." (1 Timothy 1:15; 3:1; 4:9) It's also in 2 Timothy and Titus. In addition to this phrase we catch what might be other confessional statements, perhaps the words to hymns, which we can recognize by their dense theological content.

Creedal statements are a tricky topic in churches that have their roots in the Restoration Movement. Let's get a definition first. A simple definition of creed is: a formal statement of religious belief. Here's a slightly expanded version from the Britannica Concise Encylopedia (online): "Officially authorized, usually brief statement of the essential articles of faith of a religious community, often used in public worship or initiation rites." It's the "officially authorized" and "initiation rites" that are at the heart of the disagreement with creeds in Restoration Movement churches. Creeds are statements about God and faith that are based on the Bible, but separate from the Bible. The Restoration Movement was interested in removing whatever divided the church - denominational names like "Lutheran" that implied adhering to man-made systems outside the Bible; rigid adherence to theological viewpoints that were "non-essential"; and creeds. The thinking was that "Creeds divide, but Christians should be able to find agreement by standing on the Bible itself..." (wikipedia entry).

But a creedal-like statement within the Bible becomes authoritative. And so, however these statements developed in the early church, Paul's inclusion of them in this letter to Timothy by God's inspiration, means they are truth to us. I thought it would be a good way to end our reading of 1 Timothy by simply including them here. I'm going to use several translations, chosen not to make a particular point, but for their expressiveness. Be sure to look them up in your preferred translation to see what it says. First, here are the statements identified by Paul as trustworthy sayings.

“Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (v.1:15 NET)

“If someone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a good work.” (v.3:1 NET)

“physical exercise has some value, but godliness is valuable in every way. It holds promise for the present life and for the life to come.” (v.4:8 NET)

And finally, here are the formulations that may have taken the form of hymns or statements/confessions of faith in the churches. (They may also be only Paul's formulations.)

“For there is one God and one mediator between God and human beings, Christ Jesus, himself human, who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time.” (v.2:5,6 TNIV)

“By common confession, great is the mystery of godliness:
He who was revealed in the flesh,
Was vindicated in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Proclaimed among the nations,
Believed on in the world,
Taken up in glory.” (v.3:16 NASB)

[God is]
“The blessed and sole Potentate,
The King of all who are kings
And Lord of all who are lords,
The sole Possesor of immortality,
Housed in light to which there is no approach,
Whom no human being has seen or ever could,
His is the honor and ruling power forever indeed.” (v.6:15,16 Andy Gaus' translation)

Grace to you.

The truth will out. 1 Timothy 5.

SHYLOCK

As I was reading the last two verses of this chapter, the phrase from Shakespeare, in the title of this post, kept ringing in my mind. It's from The Merchant of Venice, and here it is in context:

LAUNCELOT.
Nay, indeed, if you had your eyes, you might fail of the
knowing me: it is a wise father that knows his own child. Well,
old man, I will tell you news of your son. Give me your blessing;
truth will come to light; murder cannot be hid long; a man's son
may, but in the end truth will out.

The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, explains the phrase in this way: "One way or another, in spite of all efforts to conceal it, the truth will come to be known." Which is pretty obvious from the phrase itself, and doesn't require any understanding of where it came from.

But I do know where the phrase came from, and perhaps you do too. Knowing about this phrase is a byproduct of "cultural literacy," which is the ability to converse using the idioms, allusions, and informal content of a culture. This can be as simple as understanding road signs, to as complex as picking up the novel, For Whom the Bell Tolls, by Ernest Hemingway, and having a jump start in understanding the book because you're aware of the poem by John Donne from which the phrase was taken by Hemingway.

The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy was written by E. D. Hirsch, Jr. (something I didn't know without looking it up) as a companion to his book, Cultural Literacy. In the book, Hirsch argues for a return to a high level of literacy built on "traditional history, myth, and literature." To me, this means a pre-college education that includes the Greek myths and literature, the Bible, Shakespeare, and other classic literature, and the history of western civilizations. Until recently, this was the norm in English-speaking countries. Most people with a high school education, assuming they payed a moderate amount of attention, would know that the narrator in Moby Dick, Ishmael, had a Biblical name, and that the name was a clue into his character. Those with somewhat less education might still recognize both Ishmael and "Moby Dick" even if they didn't realize that Ishmael was a character in the novel.

Hirsch's main point in his book, and one reason for creating the dictionary, is that by concentrating on literacy, the educational system produces better learners in all fields of endeavor. Cultural literacy as Hirsch envisions it, fosters broad knowledge, shared knowledge, and communication. That's where the "traditional history, myth, and literature" enter into the picture. The American education system has gone away from this in favor of materials that emphasize skills and relevancy. Take a look at the introduction to the dictionary for a complete discussion by Hirsch.

HOMER

Cultural literacy itself, though, is a description of a phenomenon of culture, not a curriculum. If I say, "D'oh" with a certain inflection, a large percentage of the American populace will know the allusion I'm making. Given the pervasive level of communication in our society, anything can quickly become a part of the cultural consciousness and thus contribute to what is considered literacy within the culture. (IMHO, LOL.) Hirsch would say, I think, that a classic education produces a broader range of knowledge and connections, and a richness in communication that is unmatched by a set of rapidly changing elements of cultural raw material. I would agree with that, especially when it comes to the potential diversity of communication made possible by that approach, crossing boundaries of age, sex, location, race, and class. If you're over 50 it's unlikely the word Krumping means anything to you. If you're under 40 and from the west coast, it's unlikely Chappaquiddick means anything to you. But 100 years ago in America, Jonah, Aphrodite, and Shylock were known by everyone with an 8th grade education.

Knowledge of the literary content of the Bible was an essential element of the education of anyone considered "literate" until just few years ago in Western Europe and the U.S. and Canada. In fact, Shakespeare was probably aware of the truth expressed in chapter 5 of Paul's first letter to Timothy, when he penned the words that Launcelot speaks. Which I think is very cool... Shakespeare became a part of the canon of a classic education along with the Bible, which he himself drew from when he wrote. (I also think it's cool that there's a great deal of humor in The Simpsons, that is only funny when you know the Bible characters and stories the humor is based on. This is exactly what Hirsch is referring to when discussing a literate culture.)

So, here's what Paul wrote to Timothy (in King James to make it closer to Shakespeare's language):

Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after. Likewise also the good works of some are manifest beforehand; and they that are otherwise cannot be hid. (1 Timothy 5:24-25 KJV)

In other words, the truth about a person's good and bad works will be in the open, either before or after judgment -- the truth will out. In these words of Paul's, we ought to be hearing the whisper of our conscience, "Best to do the right thing, it will all be known some day." And we also hear truth in these words, a correspondence between what Paul wrote and what we experience in everyday life. From the flagrant behavior of Britney Spears, Mel Gibson, and O. J. Simpson, to the quiet accomplishments of Millard and Linda Fuller who founded Habitat for Humanity, the works are on display for all to see.

Some final words on cultural literacy.
Connections. It's all about connections.

• Shakespeare remains popular, and when I finally went to find a picture for The Merchant of Venice, I discovered that Hollywood was busy doing remakes of a number of Shakespeare's plays during the last decade, including this one. Now I'm going to have to rent the movie to see if the lines I quoted at the outset are in the movie.
• Patrick Stewart, Captain Picard in the Star Trek:STNG series, is filming a version of the play that will be located in a Vegas casino.
• There's a restaurant at our own Orenco Station named "The Merchant of Venice." I didn't see a pound of flesh on the menu.
• The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy has a very minor mention of Ishmael, and definitions for both Captain Ahab and Moby Dick. Patrick Stewart starred in a TV production of Moby Dick as Captain Ahab.
• Better luck in the dictionary when it comes to Aphrodite, aka Venus to the Romans. A definition plus a reference to a painting by Botticelli of "The Birth of Venus." (She's nude, folks.) What makes the dictionary extra relevant is a mention that the painting is often referred to as "Venus on the half-shell." Wonder if they're serving that at the "Merchant of Venice Cafe." Or is that the "Merchant of Venus?"
• If you know about "The Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon," you've experienced cultural literacy.
  

Timothy or you (or me)? 1 Timothy 4.

Listen to these instructions from this chapter (NET Bible translation).

v. 6 - By pointing out such things [all food is good if eaten in thanksgiving] to the brothers and sisters, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus

v. 7 - reject those myths fit only for the godless and gullible, and train yourself for godliness.

v. 11 - Command and teach these things [what follows].

v. 12 - Let no one look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in your speech, conduct, love, faithfulness, and purity.

v. 13 - Until I come, give attention to the public reading of scripture, to exhortation, to teaching.

v. 14 - Do not neglect the spiritual gift you have, given to you and confirmed by prophetic words when the elders laid hands on you.

v. 15 - Take pains with these things; be absorbed in them, so that everyone will see your progress.

v. 16a - Be conscientious about how you live and what you teach.

v. 16b - Persevere in this, because by doing so you will save both yourself and those who listen to you.

These are obviously personal instructions and commands given by Paul to Timothy. To what extent do they apply to you? Here's something else Paul wrote:

v. 8-10 - For “physical exercise has some value, but godliness is valuable in every way. It holds promise for the present life and for the life to come.” This saying [the quote above] is trustworthy and deserves full acceptance. In fact this is why we work hard and struggle, because we have set our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of believers.

Paul says that the quoted saying is for everyone. Does that mean it holds more authority than for us than the other commands given in this chapter?

How do you decide to apply what you read in the Bible? Randomly? Based on what sounds good? Stick to the generalized commands? By extracting principles from the specifics (and how do you do that)? Do you have a consistent way of approaching Scripture so that when you read these instructions to Timothy you know what God intended for you to do with them?

Most of us are not fully consistent when it comes to applying what we read in the Bible to our lives. I'm not talking about whether we are able to apply it or not, or whether we do live consistent lives or not. I'm talking about whether we are consistent in how we interpret what we read, and consistent in determining what the application should be, whether we're able to live it out or not.

For example, in verse 16a we read "Be conscientious about how you live and what you teach." Is this your train of thought -- 'That sounds like good advice, so God must mean it for me.' How about this -- "So I want the men to pray in every place, lifting up holy hands without anger or dispute."? (1 Timothy 2:8). Is that command meant just for the men? Do you think this way -- 'We don't pray in our culture with hands lifted up, so I'll just worry about praying and the "without anger and dispute."'?

If we look at these two verses in context, the first one is instruction directed specifically and personally to Timothy and how Paul wants him to live. The latter verse (2:8) is also instruction for Timothy, but it is instruction that Timothy is to pass on to others, or to enforce within the church. On the surface, at least, that would sound like that latter instruction is more universal in its applicability than the specific instruction to Timothy, "be conscientious..."

And yet, I'll bet that most of us would tend to apply the specific instruction to Timothy more literally, than we would the general instruction for the church. Why is that? More importantly, in doing so, are there some consistent underlying principles that we do use or could use, to help us figure this out?

I've posed a lot of questions in this post. I'd love for some of you readers to answer some of them in the comments. I'll come back to this issue in 2 Timothy, and provide my own answers and comments.

Acts 2 Church. 1 Timothy 3.

Something we hear regularly in evangelical circles is something like, "we want to be an Acts 2 church." Or, the variant, "we are an Acts 2 church." On occasion I may well have used that phrase too. What's the attraction, and what does it have to do with 1 Timothy? Here's what I wrote when we actually read Acts 2.

From what I can tell, the idea behind what people and churches mean when they say Acts 2 church, is twofold. First, they want to get as close as possible to the practices of the early church as described in Acts 2:42-47.

"They were devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. Reverential awe came over everyone, and many wonders and miraculous signs came about by the apostles. All who believed were together and held everything in common, and they began selling their property and possessions and distributing the proceeds to everyone, as anyone had need. Every day they continued to gather together by common consent in the temple courts, breaking bread from house to house, sharing their food with glad and humble hearts, praising God and having the good will of all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number every day those who were being saved." (Acts 2:42-47 NET)

Second, there is a desire to experience the same intense work of God's Spirit in the church that occurred in Acts 2. The implication is that the church will actually seek the Spirit's leading and be completely open to the work of the Spirit -- relying on God's power instead of the people's. This is an expression of attitude, and Paul wrote in 1 Thess. 5:19 that while we each receive the presence of the Holy Spirit when we become Christians (Acts 1:8; 2:38), we are NOT to, "extinguish the Holy Spirit." In other words, God allows us to experience that power (or not) based on our actions and attitudes.

Here are a couple of statements from an organization called Acts 2 Churches that typify what is meant by Acts 2 churches. "Acts 2 (A2) is an association of ministries and churches striving to impact our culture by relating 1st century values to a 21st century life." "The purpose of Acts 2 is to progressively become 'a genuine model of a Christ-like community -- experiencing, demonstrating, and sharing the love of God.'"

Without discounting the values shared by the new church in Acts 2, nor the desires to be faithful churches to those values by modern-day churches, the fact is that in this chapter of Timothy we see another step in the evolution of the early church in the establishment of requirements for two offices -- overseer/bishop (episkopos in Greek), and deacon (diakonos in Greek). This isn't the first or only place we've read about the establishment of structure to the early church. In Acts 6, for example, the first deacons/servants are chosen to take care of the widows. In Acts 14:23, Luke writes that Paul and Barnabas had appointed elders in the churches they had founded. In the letter to the Corinthians, Paul talks about several gifts and positions in the church. But in this letter it's very clear that Paul was laying out a pattern of governance that could used in all the churches. The time of the first-generation apostles was drawing to a close.

In fact, we can't really go back to be an Acts 2-only church. We also have to be a 1 Tim 3 church. And a 1 Peter 2:9 church, and an Ephesians 4:11 church. Most importantly, no matter what form of governance a local church decides on, we have to be Christ's church.

Missing the radical teaching. 1 Timothy 2.

Entire books have been written about this chapter of 1 Timothy. I'm just going to note a few items that I find interesting and try to surface some of the radical teaching of Paul that can be overlooked in any heated discussion of the "proper role" of women in the church.

First things first. Paul has told Timothy that he wants him to remain in Ephesus, addressing the false teachings of others. And Paul says in verse 1, "First of all, then, I urge that requests, prayers, intercessions, and thanks be offered on behalf of all people..." He goes on to point out that these prayers are for the benefit of all, asking for peace in which to share the gospel, and that acceptance of the gospel is God's desire for everyone. Not prayers for some, but for all, even for those in authority, and not like the prayer for Czar in Fiddler on the Roof: "God bless the Czar and keep him far, far away."

And so, Timothy, the men should pray with holy hands, not with anger and dispute. The implication in this admonition is that there was contention, unholy hands if you will, perhaps in the subject of the prayers, perhaps in the object of the prayers, perhaps in the attitude with which the prayers were made.

And, likewise, Timothy, the women should clothe themselves modestly, in good deeds. The implication, once again, is that they were not have been doing so. Remember that men and women are worshiping together, most likely in small house churches. That's radical. And Paul doesn't want that to end, but to be done properly.

Next, Paul says the women are to learn (v.11). Oh hook, you left out the most important bit -- they are to learn in quiet submission, and not teach men! No, I mentioned the learning. Paul is telling Timothy that all are to grow in their knowledge and understanding of Christ, and in the service of the goal of all people being "saved" through their knowledge of the truth of Christ as the intermediary who gave Himself as a ransom for all. Men and women. That's completely radical for the time and for the all the cultures involved - Jewish, Greek, and Roman.

Now the interesting part in what follows is that Paul is telling Timothy something different from what Timothy had already experienced with Paul. Paul's admonition about women learning was simply reinforcement of a practice he had already witnessed. But Paul was associated with women who were leaders and teachers in the church -- Phoebe and Priscilla to name two.

At this point (v.12-15) we need to step back a bit for a couple of reasons. The first is that Paul seems to be contradicting what his practice has been in the past when it comes to the practice of women teaching men. In this same church at Ephesus, Priscilla and Aquila had taught/corrected Apollos, described as an eloquent and bold speaker (Acts 18:23-26). The second reason is that the final verse (2:15) is a real puzzler. "But she will be delivered through childbearing, if she continues in faith and love and holiness with self-control." (Delivered could also be translated as preserved or saved.) The footnotes in the NET Bible identify several possible interpretations. The first three are the traditional approaches to the verse, and those footnotes also present the objections to the interpretations. Here they are:

1. "Christian women will be saved, but only if they bear children."
2. "Despite the curse, Christian women will be kept safe when bearing children."
3. "Despite the sin of Eve and the results to her progeny, she would be saved through the childbirth – that is, through the birth of the Messiah..."

The additional interpretations in the footnotes don't hang together for me, either.

And so, as I said, we need to step back. As I wrote at the beginning of this post, Paul asked Timothy to remain in Ephesus to correct false teachings and teachers. We've also discussed in class and on the blog, that the key to interpreting the epistles, is to try and determine the conditions under which the letters were written -- often the problems and questions being addressed in the letter. Paul's already told us/Timothy about the false teachings. Paul has also emphasized, in verse 7, that this message is probably for the Gentile Christians.

If the entire set of verses (2:8-15) are written as a corrective to false teachings and practices, then we have a clue as to their meaning contained within the hints in the text about those practices. We can note at least three practical problems that Paul is addressing. One was already discussed above -- the contention in the prayers of the men. The second is that some of the women were dressing immodestly. The third is that the women were too noisy during instruction. Let's add some possible false teachings that would be hinted at in these verses:

1. The elevation of the woman or the goddess. (Acts 19:23-41 contains the account of the dispute in Ephesus, and the importance of Artemis.
2. A distorted gospel, a consequence of incorrectly stating the creation order. (This would explain the emphasis Paul places on Adam in verses 13-14. In other places, 1 Cor. 15:22, for example, Paul connects Adam and Christ as part of his message of good news.)
3. A distorted view of childbirth. (Paul assures Timothy that any message intended to prevent women from having children is wrong, whether it's the danger of childbirth, or a false warning that women can't be godly if mothers.)

As I stated at the outset, this chapter has caused a lot of heartburn in the last 100 years or so, and one of the issues raised is the actual meaning of the Greek word, authentein, which is used only here in the New Testament. In the NET Bible this word is translated as "exercise authority." In other documents of the time it has a meaning like "independent authority" or "domineer." The more usual word translated as authority is exousia. Why did Paul use this word instead?

Well, that's enough for now. I'll provide a more traditional view of the specific verses about women in another post. Or... in dialog in the comments.

Hello Tim. 1 Timothy 1.

Hello Tim.

It's me, Paul. Even though you're my "genuine child in the faith", I have to say it's me Paul, an apostle of Christ by God's command. Grace, mercy, and peace to you son, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Nothing's changed since we last spoke in Macedonia. You need to stay there in Ephesus, and correct the goofy teaching of others there. And even though I say goofy, it's serious business, because these folks distract from the good new of God's redemptive plan through faith in Christ. Remember that the goal of our instruction is love -- "love that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith." Not empty, useless discussion.
....
That's why I need you there in Ephesus, and I want you to remember that you were called to this purpose in prophetic words. Son, be encouraged. Fight the good fight, holding firmly to your faith in good conscience.
....

Paul will continue his letter to his protege, encouraging him to keep to the task he's charged with, and to provide instruction in how to handle the situation he's in. For this day, I can't think of anything more beneficial to meditate on than Paul's description of the goal of instruction in the gospel: love. Love that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a sincere faith. I hope you'll spend time doing that. Take it apart and put it back together.

Want to do it with a smile? No trivialization intended, just a reminder that virtue is its own reward.

Dudley Do-Right, Nell Fenwick, Snidely Whiplash, and Horse

Three Blog Night.

Finally edited my last three entries for the end of 2 Corinthians. Catch up here, here, and here.

The third coming of Paul. 2 Corinthians 13.

This chapter marks the end of Paul's letter. I really like this ending. In fact, it's my favorite letter ending for this trip through the New Testament. It follows Paul's fabulous sentiment at the end of Chapter 12:20, "For I am afraid that somehow when I come I will not find you what I wish, and you will find me not what you wish." That sentiment is followed by a list of all the areas of their life the Corinthians need to clean up.

And then Paul says, "OK, you want strength, here I come. If that's your measure of whether Christ is in me, then every one who has sinned in the past, no, wait, every one of you who need discipline when I come, none of you will be spared. Your chance is to test yourself in advance, to be already self-disciplined and avoid my discipline."

I love Paul's hard attitude that is in love, for their good. He follows the sentiment in 12:20, with this one in 13:10, put elegantly in the NLT: "I am writing this to you before I come, hoping that I won’t need to deal harshly with you when I do come." And then he ends with words of encouragement: "... rejoice, set things right, be encouraged, agree with one another, live in peace, and the God of love and peace will be with you."

We need those reminders to examine ourselves against the standard of Jesus. To rejoice and repent. The Corinthians knew Paul was coming. But we all live in expectation of Christ's return, when everything will be set right, justice and reward handed out. Jesus told us to live with that expectation, to be about he Father's business no matter how long the wait. Paul's words remind us of that, and of the need not to wait until the arrival, but to get our act together, so to speak, right now.

Heavens and thorns. 2 Corinthians 12.

Not for the last time, Paul writes a couple of thoughts down that leave us intrigued and uncertain as to his exact meaning. Let's take a look at these and see what we can discover, and whether what remains covered really matters.

"It is necessary to go on boasting. Though it is not profitable, I will go on to visions and revelations from the Lord. I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago (whether in the body or out of the body I do not know, God knows) was caught up to the third heaven. And I know that this man (whether in the body or apart from the body I do not know, God knows) was caught up into paradise and heard things too sacred to be put into words, things that a person is not permitted to speak. On behalf of such an individual I will boast, but on my own behalf I will not boast, except about my weaknesses." (2 Corinthians 12:1-5 NET)

The first question that I have when I read this is, who was it that went to the third heaven? It must be Paul, based on his getting the thorn in the side. Consulting a couple of outside resources, the use of the third person is appropriate when talking about such an intimate God-moment. Second question is what's this about a third heaven? Followed by, is this "paradise?"

Stepping back for a minute, it's important to recognize that all of these issues are not Paul's main point. His writing about these visions is the end of his earlier litany of all the things he had experienced in the service of Christ, in contrast to those of his opponents. So we get one more clue to his opponents' statements which must have included boasting about visions and revelations they had received.

Back then to this idea of multiple heavens.

Dragging out a concordance, or better yet, using a computerized search, we can quickly discover all the places where the Greek word for heaven, ouranou, is used. Pretty quickly, it's apparent that there are three ways it is translated: air, sky, heaven or heavens. In usage the use of heaven may be a substitute for saying God, as in "kingdom of heaven" instead of "kingdom of God". But it's primary uses are in identifying the atmosphere -- where the birds are; outer space -- where the stars are; and heaven -- where God and the angels are. This corresponds to OT usage, where God is said to reside in the highest heaven.

The word paradise is used only two other times in the NT. Jesus says on the cross that the criminal crucified with Him, who acts in repentance, that "you shall be with Me in Paradise." The other place it is used is in Revelation 2:7, where Jesus refers to the tree of life which is in the Paradise of God. So, this place, too, is where God (and Christ) is.

Our conclusion then, is that Paul is talking about a sacred revelation in God's presence. Not merely a word of prophecy, or a vision or dream, but a spiritual transportation to where God is. He confesses to not understanding how the mechanics of the experience, but he does attest to its sacredness.

Let's turn now to the thorn. Interestingly enough, Paul says that God allowed this thorn to be placed and refused to remove it, to counter any pride that might result from Paul's sacred experience in God's presence. Further he says it is from Satan. We're left with a couple of questions? Was this a literal thorn (or splinter)? The phrase sure sounds metaphorical. Was it a physical affliction? A troubling situation? A person, perhaps one of those who constantly opposed Paul, even one or more of those causing the problems in Corinth? No one knows for sure. But we already have at least three useful facts about it, based only on the context.

What about our concordance? Out of luck here, or maybe in luck. The Greek word, skolops, isn't used anywhere else in the New Testament. The English word thorn/thorns, however, is, and is the translation of two other Greek words. This may help us understand that splinter or stake is closer to the correct translation as opposed to thorn, and that the phrase really is metaphorical.

Here are our facts:

1. God allowed Paul to be afflicted.
2. The affliction was evil -- it came from Satan.
3. The affliction served the purpose of keeping Paul humble, especially from the pride of his specially received revelation.

There's a big bunch of theology in those three statements. Here's one theological thought: God is sovereign -- Satan was "allowed" to afflict Paul. Here's one more: God wants us humble so He can better work through us. Your turn.

In the end, do we know what the thorn is? Do we know for a certainty if heaven has a structure apart from the three usages we discovered? The answer is no in both cases. But do we have an understanding of what Paul's point is, and what God's point through Paul is? I think so.

J'accuse - part deux. 2 Corinthians 11.

Artist's rendering of the degradation of Dreyfus.
He was publicly stripped of his rank and then imprisoned.

"I hope you will put up with a little more of my foolishness."

Thus starts chapter 11 of 2 Corinthians (NLT), and this blog entry. I wanted to make sure we captured the other accusations against Paul hinted at in this chapter, even though the chapter has much more in it. So we'll both look at the further accusations and pay attention to one or two other items in the chapter. If you missed the first part of L'affaire Dreyfus and L'affaire Paulus, pick it up here.

Quickly then, Paul's opponents considered themselves superior to Paul ...

- v.4: Because of their association or admiration of the original 11 apostles -- making them "super-apostles."

- v.5: Because Paul's inferior rhetorical abilities indicate his unfitness to teach. (Read this verse carefully. I first wrote that they simply accused Paul of inferior rhetoric. But the inference from Paul's response is that they considered him lacking in knowledge. Paul is willing to grant that his speaking skill may not match that of his opponents, or at least his rhetorical skill may not be equal, since he's unwilling to argue for argument's sake and on human terms, which he indicated in chapter 10.)

- v.7: Because of Paul's menial labor to support himself. (This latter accusation has at least two associated ideas. One would be the appeal to a class distinction -- something we've seen earlier in the the division within the Corinthian church. The other idea is that Paul was not doing what the original apostles did when commissioned by Jesus - going on their mission with nothing but the cloak on their back and depending on the hospitality of the towns they went to. <-- Anyone wanting to discuss this in the comments, have at it.)

We also learn more about Paul's accusers. They are apparently Jewish (v.22) Christians, ministers/servants/deacons of Christ (v.23), and an arrogant, domineering bunch (v.20,21). And they definitely didn't do the heavy lifting of Paul - in pioneering and suffering for Christ.

In other words, as Paul says in verse 13, they are false apostles.

Once again in the process of defending his ministry, Paul uses his words to appeal to the Corinthians to get their own act together -- to recognize his love for them; and to see that Paul considers his own weakness, strength, as they should because of how it allows the light to shine on Christ. This is so much the opposite of the way we tend to think, admiring those who demonstrate strength and eloquence, even when those skills are self-serving.

I was particularly struck by this verse while tracking down the attacks on Paul:

For such people are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness, whose end will correspond to their actions. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15 NET)

This is by no means a new warning for us as Christians. Jesus said there would be many false messiahs, and we'll soon read similar warnings from Peter. How, then, are we to recognize them? Apparently the Corinthians weren't able to. Part of the answer lies in our own maturity. In Paul's earlier letter he said, "So, brothers and sisters, I could not speak to you as spiritual people, but instead as people of the flesh, as infants in Christ. I fed you milk, not solid food, for you were not yet ready. In fact, you are still not ready..." (1 Corinthians 3:1,2) Part of the answer lies in looking at their action and the results of those actions -- the tearing down instead of building up; their self-commendation; their domineering behavior instead of a servant's heart; the many things we call fruit of the Spirit.

As we read earlier in Ephesians, we should also recognize that there are spiritual forces at work against us, and they may even be clothed in light. Remember that Satan is the one who will J'accuse us. The closer we are to Jesus and the more like Him we become, the less likely it is that we will be deceived by appearance, and the better equipped we will be to stand against those accusations.

J'accuse! 2 Corinthians 10.

Emile Zola's open letter - J'accuse!

The stinging phrase, J'accuse! (French for "I accuse") was affixed to the top of an open letter from Emile Zola to the president of France, Felix Faure, published on January 13, 1898. Zola was a famous and internationally respected writer, and this letter was intended to bring the plight of Albert Dreyfus to the attention of the international community and force the hand of the French government. Dreyfus was a Jewish army officer, accused of revealing military information to the Germans. The document was stunning, Zola's approach convoluted (getting himself put on trial), and the division in French society ran deep with long-lasting political effects. Historically, the incidents are referred to as "The Dreyfus Affair," and it was a major crisis in France during the 1890s and 1900s.

The divisions in the Corinthian church no doubt had their origin, in part, from both the occasional criticism of Paul by members of the church itself, and the active hostility and accusations of those who were enemies of Paul. We've seen these opponents by inference in the letter to the Galatian church (where this group may have been at its strongest), and in some of the underlying arguments Paul makes in his letters to Rome and to Ephesus. In Acts we read about a fairly constant dogging of his steps by both upset Jews and Jewish Christians.

What emerges in this chapter are some of the specific accusations made against Paul and his defense against them. Let's take a look at them.

The accusations:

v.1 & 10 - Paul's a coward -- meek in person, bold when writing

v.2 - Paul walked according to human standards (the flesh), an attack on his personal character

v.7 - Paul doesn't measure up to his accusers' standards of what it means to be under Christ.

v.8 & 15 - Paul was boastful -- another attack on his personal character
From earlier chapters we can add:

v.3:1 - Paul had no credentials for his authority

v. 8:20+ - (insinuated) Paul was fiddling with the funds

There will be more accusations hinted at in chapter 11. And how does Paul confront these accusations?

accusation: Paul is cowardly
counter: he reminds them that meekness and gentleness were qualities of Jesus (an alternate translation of the Greek is "with lenience and clemency"). Paul also suggests that he's perfectly capable of being as thunderous in person as he is in his letters, but he'd prefer that the Corinthians get their act together, so it won't be necessary.

accusation: Paul is fleshly
counter: even when engaging in a defense against the accusation of fleshly behavior, Paul will refrain from responding in a fleshly way. From 1 Corinthians we have an idea of what this means -- not rhetoric, not personal wealth/influence, and not special credentials; instead, the basic message of Christ crucified.

accusation: Paul is not under Christ
counter: you might want to think that through again, Pilgrim.

accusation: Paul is boastful
counter: whatever you describe as boasting, is: within the God-given authority for building you up, not tearing you down; is limited to the work God has given us; is always and only, a boast in Christ.

accusation: Paul has no credentials
counter: his accusers are just plain goofy if they think that measuring themselves (or Paul) according to their own standards demonstrates anything. (In chapter 3, Paul says that his credentials are the changed hearts and lives of the Corinthians.)

accusation: Paul might be an embezzler
counter: (from chapter 8) Paul avoids even a hint of fishy behavior concerning the offering for Jerusalem by appointing other men of good reputation to handle it, staying clear of it himself.

In the case of the Dreyfus Affair, Albert Dreyfus was accused and convicted of a crime he didn't commit. It was Zola's cry of J'accuse, saying in essence, "I accuse those who made the original false accusations to be guilty of a monstrous miscarriage of justice.", that led to the eventual reversal of the verdict against Dreyfus. In the case of Paul, he makes his own defense against the false accusations of his detractors, in the process also turning the accusations back on them. In both cases, these false accusations led to incredible division between those who chose one side or the other.

Cartoon by Caran d'Ache (Emmanual Poiré)
Published in 1898 in the newspaper, le Figaro
Title: A Family Supper
First panel caption : above all, let us not discuss the Dreyfus Affair
Second panel caption: they have discussed it

As always, Paul's arguments lead us to new truths. Here's one: even within the boundaries of the work God has chosen for us, there is room for continued growth. You can dig out some others.

Wordsmith. 2 Corinthians 9.

Sometimes when I'm writing these entries, I have an idea about what I want to say, but not always exactly how I'm going to express that idea. It's often the case that as the words hit the screen, they trigger other words in my mind. Or ways to use those word again in the rest of the sentence or paragraph. This is probably the mark of a mediocre writer. Or maybe a blog writer -- where timing is of the essence. Looking back through this blog, I see, for instance, sentences like these:

Here are a couple more thoughts about the chapter, to prompt your own thoughts.

And Christ's church isn't supposed to about division, but about multiplication.

Each of these verbal tests was designed to trap Jesus into either saying something the leaders could object to or something the people would object to.

(I admit that I actually like the line about division and multiplication, but it definitely wasn't planned.)

On certain days, as I read Paul, I wonder whether this same thing happens to him. As he's writing/dictating about giving, he happens upon the thought "God loves a cheerful giver," and that leads to "God is able to make all grace overflow...", and then this naturally flows into "god who provides seed..." Or does Paul work with more intentionality -- thinking completely through the idea of giving, before ever writing about this gift that he wants to make sure is being prepared as promised. And in that process, realizing that he wants to make sure he tells the Corinthians that we all need to remember that God is the ultimate giver.

Either way, we have this lovely thought expressed in verse 10, "Now God who provides seed for the sower and bread for food will provide and multiply your supply of seed and will cause the harvest of your righteousness to grow." God provides the seed, He provides the life process that causes the seed to grow into grain that can be turned into bread, and He provides results beyond what the gift of the Corinthians will do in meeting the immediate needs of the Christians in Jerusalem. God is even the provider of the spirit of giving, as Paul writes in the next couple of verses. J. B. Phillips translated these verses in this way:

"He who gives the seed to the sower and turns that seed into bread to eat, will give you the seed of generosity to sow, and, for harvest, the satisfying bread of good deeds well done. The more you are enriched by God the more scope there will be for generous giving, and your gifts, administered through us, will mean that many will thank God. For your giving does not end in meeting the wants of your fellow-Christians. It also results in an overflowing tide of thanksgiving to God. Moreover, your very giving proves the reality of your faith, and that means that men thank God that you practise the Gospel that you profess to believe in, as well as for the actual gifts you make to them and to others. And yet further, men will pray for you and feel drawn to you because you have obviously received a generous measure of the grace of God." (2 Corinthians 9:10-14 Phillips New Testament)

Nice wordsmithing, Paul.