John 3:4

So far we have seen Jesus tell Nicodemus that without receiving birth from above (not again) we cannot in anyway recognize and understand the kingdom of God. This next verse is unfortunately misunderstood and I hope to rectify the misconception that people have about Nicodemus. In verse 4 Nicodemus we are told says, lego (3004) to say logically, to Jesus, "How is a man able to be born, being old? He is not able to enter into his mother's womb a second time and be born?" Remember that culture, history and in the case of religion, commentary, can give more clues as to the correct interpretation than can interpretation with language alone. In this case language isn't the indicator of interpretation although we will look at it but rather the Talmud. After the Babylonian captivity, Jews began to write commentaries on the Torah and there were certain things that became a part of Jewish religious thinking. During Passover, a cup is dedicated to the righteousness that belongs to God but as I read the prayer and commentary for modern Seder practices I discovered this thinking and where it originated from. Jews believed that there were two ways an individual could be declared righteous: the first was from birth and the second was being made righteous by God. We believe in original sin and that as Psalm 51 tells us we are sinful from conception. Jewish thought however differed and the idea that someone could be born righteous was possible. Jesus, the only One born righteous, and who came to die for all born unrighteous, was the only One qualified to dispute this theology. Nicodemus was old according to this verse. According to context and language Nicodemus asks, "How is a man able to be born, being old?" The verb eimi (5607) is a present tense participle meaning that the subject is old and keeps being old. Nicodemus is referring to himself although he seems to be referring to himself in third person. If it were a hypothetical question Nicodemus could have used the aorist tense "having been old" but instead he uses the present tense participle which indicates the present state and continual state of being old. Nicodemus was not questioning Christ by thinking physically but rather Nicodemus misunderstood the spiritual concept. He thought Jesus meant that a man had to be reborn in order to obtain righteousness. He didn't understand that wasn't how a man received righteousness in God's plan. We see this in the second part of the verse, "He is not able to enter his mother's womb a second time and be born?" It is interesting that Nicodemus doesn't use ou, the absolute negative particle "not" but the relative negative particle, me which gives the possibility that something may happen. He leaves room for the possibility of a man being born a second time but thinks from what he knows that this is unlikely. Nicodemus again isn't questioning Christ as much as he is trying to understand what Christ is saying. Nicodemus in both parts of his question uses dunamai (1410) able or having power in reference to a second birth. Dunamai is not speaking of the actual exertion of power or ability but the potential ability or power to do something. Again Nicodemus is talking theoretical instead of actual. Nicodemus we know from this verse is old but we also see something else about him. He doesn't consider himself righteous. Remember there are two ways of obtaining righteousness and Nicodemus knows he was not born righteous and doesn't seem to think God has made him righteous. David, Moses or Abraham was seen as worthy of this honor just as Catholics deem only certain Christians as "saints". Nicodemus didn't presume God had made him righteous but it was a sure thing if he could be born for a second time righteous. This tells us about the humility of Nicodemus and why Christ would show concern and instruction toward him but would rebuke the others with Nicodemus. Nicodemus being old was coming to the end of his life and knew he had not been born righteous or made righteous so that Jesus' words were hope to him and he wanted earnestly to understand them. Nicodemus gets a bad rap for being cowardly and spiritual dense when in reality he came with other Pharisees and simply had bad theological information about the Torah. As we see in verse five Jesus patiently leads him through correct theology.

We have seen so far in John 3 who Nicodemus is and who he believes Jesus is. In John 3:3 we see what Jesus' response was to all this flattery. We see that Jesus answered, the Greek word apokrinomai (611), which is the combination of apo (575) originally from and krino (2919) to discern judge or separate. Together this word means to answer but with discretion or in response to previous circumstances. Even though it seems completely off the subject Jesus is answering Nicodemus perhaps not in the manner that Nicodemus' greeting would have warranted but He answers according to a deeper subject Nicodemus introduces, that he and those with him recognized and understood that Jesus had come originally from God as a teacher and secondly that no one could do the signs Jesus did except that person have God with him. Jesus expounds upon the concepts Nicodemus introduces and explains why He came to them, "Amen, Amen, I am saying to you if not this one, had been born from above, he is absolutely not able to have recognized and understood the kingdom of God." Jesus uses a Hebrew term transliterated into Greek, amen (281), meaning truly or surely in Hebrew has the idea of certainty or "so be it". Here Jesus uses it twice. When someone wanted to specify the importance and truthfulness of what was said next they would utter twice, amen, amen. "Truly, truly" would be acceptable or "this is the truth". Jesus immediately starts with asserting that what He said next could not be debated but had to be accepted as the absolute truth. He then tells Nicodemus and those with him, lego (3004) to say logically, here the root form, which is present tense, active voice and indicative mood. Lego is also first person singular which with the present tense, on-going action that has no time set for its ending, makes this very interesting. "I am saying" is grammatically correct in English but there is more to this. It could be translated as "I am always saying" because of the divinity of Christ plus the message He is delivering. Because He says "I am always saying" He is actually speaking to us just as much as to His audience at the time. Anyone reading what He said realizes that His message has never changed and that we must accept that this statement is truth and unchanging. Next Jesus says that, "I am always saying to you". "To you" is the 2nd person pronoun but is singular and not plural which shows again Jesus speaks to Nicodemus but then changes to speak to the plural "you" later. Jesus then uses the conjunction ean (1437) if with the negative relative particle me (3361) not. Together they mean "if not" "unless" "except". Ean means "if" but that there is a strong possibility of it occurring and me, a possibility of something happening. Me indicates that choice is involved and that we can choose to do something or not. Here Jesus indicates that there is choice involved but that "if not this one had been born from above" the result would be the opposite of recognizing and understanding the kingdom of God. The indefinite pronoun is singular here emphasizing the individual's decision instead of the collective. This is important because denominations in the past and present wrongly think there is a corporate relationship to Christ based on works instead of a personal relationship to Christ based on grace. Next we see that "if not this one had been born from above", the "had been born" gennao (1080) to be born, is singular again, aorist tense, passive voice and subjunctive mood. This "one" we see by the aorist tense has been completed in his or her birth which shows us the way that God views this process. Being outside of time God sees our birth in Him as a completed action even if we are going through the process in linear time. This is also important because it shows us our salvation in Him is a done deal and assured to us. It can't be taken from us because it is a permanent condition. Next we see it is in the passive voice, which the verb itself is passive in nature. We often refer to the birthing process as being controlled by the child but in reality the child receives the birthing process because the woman's body dictates when the baby will be born. Salvation is not our doing or initiated by us but by the Spirit as Jesus points out later, and we receive or reject it. Lastly gennao is subjunctive meaning that it is dependant on another action occurring or it is the dependant action for something else to occur. Here it is the dependant verb for something else to occur but it also is another indicator of choice. Birth is an fascinating analogy of salvation. Jesus uses this to illustrate what must take place within us in order for the spiritual world to be accessed. When a woman's body determines that the baby cannot be fed any longer in utero a hormone is released that causes her womb to begin contracting. This will open the pathway for the baby to pass through. The fluid that surrounded the baby and kept it safely in the womb is released and the baby has only one option and that is birth. Our introduction to God and the process by which we come to Him may be fast or it may be slow depending on our individual circumstances and on us. When my eldest niece was born it took over sixteen hours for her to make her entrance. This long process doesn't put the baby in distress and is normal for a first pregnancy. My second niece however came fast and furious and caused my sister-in-law a great deal of pain. All three of my nieces came early but they came into this world when they were caused to do so. This does not mean that God does all the work and we do nothing but rather we participate by accepting truth and allowing Him to deliver us into the spiritual world. We have to be completely transformed and birth illustrates the becoming new but also starting over and understanding like babies we have to grow up spiritually. So we receive birth and that birth come Jesus says "from above". Unfortunately some English translations translate this as "born again" and this is incorrect because Jesus is explaining where the birth comes from and that is "above" meaning "from God" and not "born again" which doesn't tell us from what or where have we been born. "Born again" also is incorrect because we are born physically once and we are born spiritually once therefore, born again is really inaccurate . So Jesus tells Nicodemus, "Truly, Truly I am always saying to you if not this one had been born from above he is absolutely not able". "He is absolutely not able" in Greek is ou (3756) the absolute negative particle which means it is impossible for something to occur and dunamai (1410) to be able, to have the power to do something. The negative particle ou is used often in the New Testament but the English translates it and the relative negative particle the same, "not". Here Jesus stresses that we cannot in any way obtain the ability to recognize and understand the kingdom of God without having been born from above. Dunamai is in the present tense, middle voice and indicative mood. If we are born from above we can constantly recognize and understand the kingdom of God. The present tense remember is ongoing action that doesn't tell us when it will end. If we are not born from above it is impossible for us to recognize and understand the kingdom of God. Birth from above is imperative for identifying and understanding the kingdom of God. I was born in the South as were generations of my ancestors going back to the early eighteen hundreds. Being born in the South there are cultural, religious, artistic and dietary differences than other parts of the country. My birth into the South made me not just a part of it but loyal to it. I understand the subtle use of language and manners that those from up North or out West don't detect. If these individuals were to come across someone that claimed to be from the South they wouldn't be able to tell for sure and would rely on the accent alone. In the same way if we are not from it how can we identify and understand something like the kingdom of God? Next dunamai is in the middle voice which tells us that something or someone is influencing or motivating this "one" to have the ability to recognize and understand the kingdom of God if they are born from above. If however they have not been born from above, the negative particle ou tells us that absolutely in no way and an individual identify and understand the kingdom of God because they have rejected that birth. If you see a middle voice especially in texts that deal with doing something spiritually the Spirit is the usually the One motivating the action. This is an incredible truth that the Spirit causes us to want to know spiritual things. Next we have the infinitive eido (1492) which is in the aorist tense and active voice. Eido and ginosko (1097) are often misunderstood because the Greek process of learning isn't explained. Greeks used vocabulary to explain the progression of learning with ginosko being the acquiring of information and learning how something or someone works but with a relational model. Eido however is the end result of ginosko. As children we are taught the alphabet and how those letters form words. This is ginosko and in this process we sound out words to know how to read them. The end result is recognizing and understanding the words we see not just in books but in anything that contains language. So Jesus isn't talking about "see" which is how the English translators interpreted it but without being born from above it is impossible to recognize or understand the kingdom of God. This infinitive is in the aorist tense just as the "had been born". They are a packaged deal and must be recognized as such. The Spirit points out what is of that kingdom and what is not in our process of accepting Christ, because God knows remember who will accept Him out of that process and who won't. Those He knows will accept Him their process in coming to Him is the delivery time and part of the birth in which the kingdom of God is revealed. Recognizing is important but understanding the kingdom of God is equally important and part of our growth in Christ. Many believers might be able to recognize the things of the kingdom of God but do not have a good understanding of it. Birth gives us the opportunity and ability to recognize and understand but it is a choice we must decide if it is important enough to us to have and pursue. Lastly is "to have recognized and understood the kingdom of God". "The kingdom of God" is the accusative singular feminine form of the root basileia (932), royal kingdom or dominion and the genitive, singular masculine form of Theos (2316). Matthew calls it "the kingdom of heaven" while Luke, Mark and John call it primarily "the kingdom of God". In the Old Testament it was called Zion the city that Jews would see as the final resting place after death and after the final judgment. "The kingdom of God" Jesus has said is not of this world, it is a spiritual place here while we are in our fallen physical forms but the reality of it is when the tribulation is over and the second coming of Christ is done, the millennium is over and the heavens and the earth pass away we'll find a magnificent incorruptible all consuming home and sanctuary. God's reign as King of this kingdom is permanent and irrevocable and Christ's gift to purchase the subjects for this kingdom makes it a different expensive kingdom. In His era, kings taxed the subjects of the kingdom to pay for the king's army and luxury but in this kingdom God sacrificed Himself to get back those taken from Him and protect them under His name. This kingdom doesn't function as earthly ones do. The King conquers spirits and minds to save them and free them from spiritual slavery. His riches we have access to and we are given the privilege to come before Him whenever we have needs without fear. Lastly this kingdom is pure, holy and perfect and the end result of God's reign and our acceptance of birth from above. Next we'll examine how all this together creates the first part of Jesus' explanation of the gospel.

John 3

In verse 2 we see that Nicodemus comes to Jesus by night. In John 2:23 we find out that it was Passover and it was logical that Nicodemus came by night. It was common of that era to meet people for social reasons at night but somehow commentators have read into this that Nicodemus was fearful of the Pharisees seeing him with Jesus. We know from 3:11-12 Jesus stops speaking to Nicodemus and addresses those with Nicodemus. In the Greek text the "you" there is plural and not singular so Jesus isn't speaking just to Nicodemus but others who were there. This is important because you see a division in both intent and understanding of the people with Nicodemus versus Nicodemus' reasons for talking with Jesus. Nicodemus shows his respect by calling Jesus "Rabbi" a Hebrew word meaning teacher. This act we don't see from the Pharisees in other places only by Nicodemus. Notice Nicodemus says that "we have recognized and understood that You have come a teacher from God". Oidamen from oida the older form of eido (1492) is a plural perfect tense verb which tells us again there were people with him and that they had been deliberating concerning Jesus. Eido means to recognize what you are looking at and understanding what you are seeing. Unfortunately it gets slapped with the word "know" or "see" in the English translations. Nicodemus and the "we" claimed to identify the fact that Jesus was authentically from God. He says that Jesus was from God using the preposition apo (575) which means from but more specifically originally from. Para (3844) in contrast means from nearby. English translators add an "as" to make it grammatically correct but in the text Nicodemus and the "we" recognized that Jesus was a teacher also, from God. The word teacher in Greek didaskolos (1320) means one who teaches doctrine so in the Jewish context the teacher answered to the scribes. Jesus was recognized for His ability to teach doctrine with Divine influence but they still didn't see Jesus as an equal or as God but did recognize the fact He had some relationship to God. Now the "we" is questionable in this regard as we will see in 11-12, but Nicodemus seems genuine in his assertion. Nicodemus gives the reasons for why he and the "we" concluded Jesus was a teacher from God, "for this reason no one is able to do these signs which You do except God be with Him." In that era Jews were obsessed with signs because Old Testament prophesy was filled with things to look for when Messiah was coming or the world was being judged. The word in Greek semeion (4592) a miracle that has a spiritual end, which makes them finger marks of God. Paul said that Jews want signs and Greeks knowledge and in this obsession with signs there is an awe at the miracle but no recognition of the spiritual implications. Here however Nicodemus states that he and the "we" did connect the dots and wanted to hear more from Him. Next we'll examine Jesus' response to Nicodemus.

John 3:1-21

Having studied John 3 earlier this year I discovered a great deal of mistranslation and misunderstanding of this instance in the ministry of Christ. Remember that John is not a synoptic gospel. Instead of starting at the birth of Christ John begins before the creation of the universe. John also uses a more Socratic approach to the retelling of the life of Christ. This just means that the Greek philosopher Socrates asked questions to teach and to learn. If you read through the book of John you find Jesus asking a lot of questions, teaching His audience through this type of discourse. Chapter three is one of these conversations. In verse one we are told a great deal about one of the characters in this chapter. John uses en, the imperfect tense and indicative form of eimi (2258) "be". This is the usual way John introduces someone. I say this because there are instances John uses ginomai (1096) "become" to introduce characters. Because of this if you come across ginomai in an introduction use the literal meaning such as in 1:6, "There became a man". In 2:23-25 we learn when this conversation takes place at the Feast of the Passover. This is important to understand why Nicodemus by night. We will look at that a little later but now we see that Nicodemus was a man out of the Pharisees. The method by which a young man could become a Pharisee depended on his father's position. If a young man's father was a Pharisee then he would be expected to follow in his father's path and be educated to get him past the academic cuts. If a young man didn't have a father who worked in the temple or was a Pharisee then he had to be an exceptional student to make the cuts along the way. This would lead them to the temple to be educated and then they would be initiated into the Pharisees. We see in verse 10 that Nicodemus wasn't just a Pharisee but also a teacher. Some Pharisees held government positions and taught. This is why John points out that Nicodemus was an archon (758), a ruler of the Jews. The Roman government realized that if they appointed the Pharisees over districts to interpret and judge according to Jewish law, they could keep the peace better. So in addition to being a government official he was a teacher. The name Nicodemus means victor among the people. It is interesting that he has a Greek name that isn't a Greek translation of a Hebrew name. He may have been from outside of Judea like Paul or his parents decided to name him with a Greek name. Next we see that Nicodemus came to Jesus by night. Unfortunately commentators have surmised that it was out of fear of the Pharisees. We saw that the Passover Feast was going on when Jesus was in Jerusalem. Passover was a big part of Jewish culture and a busy time for Pharisees. Being both religious and governmental officials they were required to procide over what the priests did not. So it was necessary for Nicodemus to meet Jesus at night after a long Feast period. Also there is another aspect that cancels out fear as a reason. Later in verse 11-12 we find out Nicodemus is not alone because John uses a plural pronoun "you". From the way Jesus addresses them they came with Nicodemus and were more than likely Pharisees. They often would go to check out new Rabbis to see if they were keeping the Law correctly. Keep that in mind when looking at the rest of the chapter I'll continue this tomorrow.

Mercy (cont.)

Mercy on my last post I explained from scripture is compatible with other gifts and also a requirement given to us to use. Prophecy and mercy have to co-exist otherwise the book of Jonah would not have been so remarkable. Jonah didn't want to see the city of Nineveh turn toward God because he knew God kept His promises and wouldn't destroy them. Jonah sits outside the city angry that they were not destroyed knowing they would be the ones to judge Israel according to prophecy. Habakkuk was shown the wickedness of Israel and he cried out for justice until he learned who God was going to use to judge Israel. His cry for justice was not merciless. Habakkuk tells us in 1:4, "Therefore the law is ineffective, and justice is never upheld for the wicked surround the righteous therefore justice comes out perverted." God had mercy on the righteous and the innocent who were being afflicted and oppressed by their own countrymen and women. However when Habakkuk learns that a foreign nation who is in his eyes more wicked than Israel his call for justice is tempered. But God knows compassion has to be stronger than pride. Habakkuk's pride didn't want a nation like the Chaldeans judging Israel because of the shame it would place on God's people. Notice that God's people. God showed Habakkuk that pride blinds an individual from seeing the reason shame must come even to the people of God. That end is blessing and mercy. In 3:18-19 we see that Habakkuk gets it and is humbled before the Lord, "Yet I will exult in the Lord, I will rejoice in the God of my salvation, Jehovah is my strength and He has made my feet like hinds' feet and makes me walk on my high places." Without mercy Habakkuk would not have heard from the Lord and seen what he saw among the people. Both these prophets show us that Gal. 5:22-23 must exist within us in order for the the words of the Lord to come to us and out of us. Paul says agape, unconditional, sacrificial, proactive and responsive not reactive love must be an inward production of the Spirit followed by joy which is inward stability not moved by what is going on around you. Next is peace, the ceasing of our working against the Spirit and instead participating with Him, and makrothumia, patience with people or being slow to lose your temper with others, being predictable and mature. Following makrothumia is chrestotes being beneficially useful to those around you and then agathosune being beneficially good in addition to being beneficially useful. Next we see pistis, trusting because we are so persuaded by God and passionate to act out of that trust which leads to praotes understanding and trusting God's sovereignty that we treat each situation individually waiting for God to tell us what is the appropriate response. Out of all of these comes self-control or rather being master over one's body, emotions and logic. These characteristics actually define the mercy God wants us to have. For that reason we must not be spineless or an enabler but we must also be empathetic, useful in God's economy and proactive. Mercy like humility and agape must be God's possession and come only from Him or else we are promoting a bad imitation of the real thing and an enemy of the gospel.

Mercy

Growing up in the church I have watched some pretty horrible things done by believers and called "Biblical". I often heard those who claimed to have the gift of prophecy say they didn't have the gift of mercy, basically stepping over the emotionally and spiritually wounded. I watched wondering was this really what God wanted us to be? As a teenager I was afraid to question my elders whom I thought knew more about scripture than I did. As an adult and through a great deal of study I realized making such statements is not only not Biblical but contrary to the character of God. Romans 8:29 tells us God's map for us was to be conformed to the image of Christ. The cross I would most definitely say qualifies as mercy. The gifts have been mischaracterized as possessions instead of "as needed" gifts of power from God and more aptly charismata, results of grace. My ministry happens to be teaching and discipling but I need mercy just as much as I need "logic of knowledge" to convey truth to my students. When we are not the character of Christ we turn people off to the truth. Jesus sent His disciples away in John 4 so that He could speak to the woman at the well. When they came back they were disgusted that He was speaking not just to a Samaritan woman but a woman period. They didn't ask why. Jesus told them that He had food and that food was always to do the will of God who sent Him and to complete that work. The disciples thought that since they didn't say anything they couldn't get in trouble. Jesus rebuked them for their lack of mercy and human reaction to the woman at the well. Mercy is God's will and God's work. James tells us in 2:12-13, "So speak and so keep doing as through a law of liberty being about to be judged. For this reason the Judgement will be unmerciful to the one choosing not to do mercy and mercy boasts against judgment." What mercy we display on earth will stand for us against judgment. But be clear mercy is not being soft hearted, mercy is divine compassion. In Romans 9:15 Paul tells us that God pities those whom He pities and has mercy on whom He has mercy. The difference here are those will let Him show mercy and those who stubbornly reject Him. In Romans 12:1 Paul uses the same Greek word oiktirmos, the noun form, saying "I strongly encourage you through the compassions of God to present your body as a living sacrifice, holy, beyond pleasing to God your reasonable service of worship." We can't fix every one's problems but we can be a friend, a source of encouragement to keep going in Christ, lighting fires under others to beneficial works, to grieve with them when they grieve and rejoice with them when they rejoice. Most of all we are to be a living gospel. Years ago I had a friend who had lost pretty much all of her friends because of her spiritual immaturity. I was the last one and she called me one night to accuse me of hurting her feelings. I was annoyed and ready to just throw the towel in BUT GOD!!! He calmed me down and instead of saying she didn't have the right to be hurt I asked her if I had ever said anything like that in the past (what she thought I was implying) and she thought for a moment and said no. I asked her had I always shown consideration for what she endured growing up and she again agreed that was the case. I then told her what God had done in my own life and that I was convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt God could do the same in hers. I didn't lose that friendship and I actually gained a student. I learned a valuable lesson. Even if I didn't intend to be hurtful my carelessness with my speech could be interpreted as hurtful. To this day if I think I said something that could be taken wrong I go to that person and apologize. People look at me like I've lost my mind but then I see them relax because they are glad to know I think they are important. I have gained more students through my kindness and compassion than through my teaching. The reason being, my teaching is punctuated with the character of God.

A Rock, A Hard place and Me

Have you ever been in an impossible situation where you had to choose between two friends or maybe between a friend and a family member? Have you ever had to choose between your spouse and your children or other family members? It is difficult to know how to resolve these disputes and even worse when we have to choose a side. Sometimes both parties are wrong and we have to refuse to side with either one. I'm doing a study of 1 John with two of my classes. John had to confront a growing movement within the church called Gnosticism, which threatened to undermine not only the gospel but the authority of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. John had to take a stand but not only that, he had to inform the audience of 1 John that they couldn't ride the fence. They too had to choose a side. Were they for the gospel as it was originally taught to them or were they for the Gnostics? John's letters give us the evidence he presented to his audience for why the original gospel he taught them was the only gospel. When we are put in a position where two friends may be in a confrontation, we often want to do what the flesh suggests and that is pick the friend we are the closest to, and side with them. Sometimes the flesh will lie to us and make us fear losing the closest relationship if we don't take their side even if they are wrong. Jonathan, Saul's son became friends with David and defied his father when Saul went after David trying to kill him out of his jealousy. Jonathan was a godly young man and knew that David was innocent of any wrong doing. He chose David over his father because he knew his father was doing something that violated the law and was outright murder. That decision had to be difficult because Saul was his dad. I've never had to chose between a friend and a family member but I have had to choose between friends. I have been burned sometimes for choosing the wrong friend and ended up losing both relationships. When we are placed in the middle of a dispute we first need to go to God before we do anything. Unfortunately we get caught up in the drama and forget to stop and ask the Lord for direction. He will show you what to do next if anything. It is always wise to investigate the stories of each person first and then assess each one's character. If you have a friend who is consistently mature spiritually and isn't known for being dishonest, that friend has character on their side. If you have another friend who feeds off of drama and is usually immature both emotionally and spiritually there will be a question as to their motives and honesty. However we are not God and we cannot determine who is lying and who is telling the truth. Unfortunately both may have perceived the event or argument differently. If we ask for wisdom from God as James 3 instructs us to do there are characteristics we obtain when we request God's wisdom. James says that wisdom from above is peaceful. If there is a peaceful resolution God will let us know. Sometimes it is not what we expect and yet it is the best option. Many times however God places in situations where there is no easy outcome so that we prove we are His creation and not acting out of the flesh. The worst things we can do is avoid the two friends and act as if nothing is wrong, talk about them behind their backs, and meddle in their argument without being asked. God wants our dependency in everything because our personal relationships with people are where we will shine or fail in terms of displaying God's character. Agape is not always showing unconditional loyalty but providing what an individual needs. If they feed off of drama they do not need a friend to keep feeding the beast but one who says "that's enough". If you are in a situation where you are placed in the middle of a dispute between two friends, first go to God, investigate so you have all the facts (there are two sides to every story), be restrained from judgment until you are clear as to what the argument is about and what the facts are, and if possible find a resolution that reconciles both parties. If there is no resolution available then you must choose not according to loyalty or blood relationship but according to what is godly and what is right. God never promised us that the Christian life would be easy and often the hardest thing is what He requires from us. If we choose to trust Him and do the hard thing we learn that the hard thing isn't impossible with God.

Greek Word of the Week

Kalos and agathos-these two words are translated as good but they mean different things in terms of "good". Kalos is an adjective which means the best not just "good". Kalos speaks of the quality or in God's case the inherent "goodness" of His character. It is also imparted to us through Christ and the best God wants for us. James 4:17 says that the one knowing what the (kalos) good is and doesn't do it it is sin to him. In contrast agathos means to be beneficially good or profitable. In Romans 12:2 Paul uses agathos, "proving that the will of God is (agathos) good, well-pleasing and perfect." Here Paul is characterizing God's well as beneficial and profitable. In Romans 2:7 agathos describes the works of those who have obtained eternal life through Christ. Out of kalos, agathos externally is seen. In the Septuagint the Greek translation of the Old Testament, in Genesis 1 "it was good" is kalos showing again that our English word doesn't describe adequately how God viewed what He had created. In Romans 9:11 we see that before the twins Jacob and Esau were born and before they did (agathos) good or bad God's purpose would stand in terms of Jacob obtaining the birthright of Isaac. Agathos will characteristically describe actions while Kalos will describe the character of the individual. For this reason both are often confused. Check when you come across "good" and see which word it actually is in the Greek.

Where's the Beef?

A funny commercial years ago had an elderly lady asking when she opened up the bun to her hamburger and discovered a small dime sized patty, "Where's the beef?" In the last two decades I have been asking myself that question but in response to teaching and preaching coming out of the modern church. Hebrews 5:11-14 tells us that we should be at some point able to consume meat and move on from the basics about God. Hebrews 6:1-3 tells us what those basics are, repentance from dead works faith in God, ceremonial washings, what teaching doctrine is, lying on of hands, resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment. These the author of Hebrews tells us are milk and not meat. Meat Hebrews tells us allows the believer to exercise their faculties both spiritual and physical to know the difference between God's best and subtle evil. The author of Hebrews had to stop a discourse on Melchizedek and how he was a type of Christ because it was simply over his audience's head. Peter says of Paul in 3:15-17 that Paul had written according to the wisdom given him but that some of his concepts were hard to understand but Peter did not give them an out or say he'd admonish Paul for being too deep, but rather he warns his audience to be on guard against those who'd pervert Paul's writings. In our modern church there is a movement to make scripture easier to understand but what has happened is the spoon feeding of milk to churches instead. Like petulant children those who do Precept, Beth Moore studies etc. complain like the Israelites coming out of Egypt that they don't have time for the homework or the homework is too long or my favorite, the homework is too hard. Many come to church on Sundays and Wednesdays and receive an hour's worth of feeding and believe it will last them the rest of the week. What happens? Pastors must lay a foundation again and again and again because believers cannot move on to full growth. So what does meat look like? Philippians 3 tells us that deep teaching will create a deeper more intimate knowledge of Christ and keep solidifying that bond. If we are simply memorizing the work someone else has done we are adopting someone else's faith and not studying to learn for ourselves who Christ really is. Do I say don't ever do Bible study books? No! But it cannot be the main course at every single meal or else the result will be dependency on a teacher instead of on Christ. Secondly meat is characterized by what stretches or challenges us. Psalm 119:18 says, "uncover my eyes so that I may comprehend wonderful things out of Your law". Paul says of the Ephesians in 1:17-18 that he hoped God would enlighten the eyes of their mind to know a list of very important scriptural concepts. They were a logical progression of ideas building upon one another. But Paul makes it very clear it has to mentally and spiritual challenge the individual believer. Thirdly meat must not just stay hamburger but must become steak, fillet mignon and Kobe beef. The author of Hebrews wanted to explain the concept of the temple being a type of what existed in heaven, but going into depth about what that entailed was difficult for his audience. Being Jewish they understood the function of the temple and the instruments within it but didn't get the link between the spiritual existence of the original in heaven versus the copy here on earth and how that information could be applied to their faith. Expository then, although the most popular form of preaching and teaching is not meat. Exegesis that surfacely skips over verses taking out a few concepts here and there is not meat. Exegesis that goes line by line word for word, pulls out the interpretation which can stand up to scrutiny and provides application which fits the interpretation is however meat. We as the modern church have become vegetarians and call tofu patties hamburger when in fact they are not meat in anyway. Once we as the body accept we have to have meat to grow we will discover a deeper richer faith.

Spring, Rebirth

I've been watching the tree that is technically in my neighbor's yard begin to sprout rose colored buds as spring wakes up the sleeping giant. I've watched since we moved in the tree go from a sprig about the height of my shoulders to the height of my neighbor's second story house in six years. One day I'll look out and those buds will have turned to leaves and birds will nest in its boughs. There are two remarkable things about that tree. The first is its location to the ditch where rain water runs off the land. It has even through drought had ample water supply. Its second feature is the twisted truck of the tree. It curves up at the bottom and leans slightly askew. When it was young the strong violent storms that moved through our area bent it over but didn't break it. The scars of those storms permanently altered the direction it grew. Still because the roots were strong and it remained so close to water it didn't just blossom it flourished. In the winter when its leaves turn golds, coppers and reds and its leaves begin to die and fall to the earth, the tree makes its descent into slumber and appears to die for the winter. But as soon as the sun comes closer to the earth the tree begins to awake and grows in the short few months of spring and summer. The idea of resurrection was associated with spring, the death and rebirth of life. Experientially knowing the power of the resurrection of Christ makes us in our time here like that tree in my neighbor's yard. If we plant ourselves near water and let our roots grow deep and not fight the death we need to experience to know the rebirth of spring we will know life overflowing and flourishing like that tree. So that when the storms come they will not break us but place in our boughs and truck the mark of survival. This mark is there to remind us not of our beautiful perfect features lost but that we needed to grow in a different direction to know the One who kept us from breaking.

Is Pain a Gift?

I heard a pastor on the radio claiming that pain is a gift. His sermon was unremarkable but this concept had been in my mind for years. Having a psychology background I had studied how we form empathy for one another and in recent years researchers discovered that autistic children do not form empathic relationships the same way that non autistic children do. When as children we fall, we cut ourselves or get sick those memories are so powerful they imprint themselves upon our minds. When empathy is fostered by parents or guardians the child recognizes pain of others through their own powerful memories of associated pain. The physical is the first to understand and then the emotional so that when people watch a movie which is fictional the empathetic reaction is the same as when it happens in real life. We cry and laugh and groan based upon our own experiences with pain. We ask the question why does God allow suffering? Since we have been given a will God doesn't make us do anything we don't already want to do. Does He manipulate events and circumstances? Absolutely. So let's say for a moment that we were God and had to determine what all suffering was and then create a plan to eliminate it with the one rule, no forcing of anyone to do it. How would you accomplish that feat? Would you send someone to warn everyone about the impeding threat of violence, war, disease or natural disaster? If you did would they accept that warning or ignore it? So maybe you do something to get their attention, for instance take out an ad in the New York Times of what was going to happen and why. Would everyone read it and believe it? In the end to persuade individuals of even greater pain would we not have to do the hardest thing which is to allow some pain to protect from the horrible pain? Many asked why the Holocaust occurred, that no merciful God could have allowed it. Very few people know that during the Black Plague in the 14th century Germany killed 200,000 Jews by burning them alive or beating them to death. It wasn't German hicks drunk one night with no idea of morality but rather passion players who incited mobs to turn on Jews in their villages after showing the story of Christ and calling for them to repent. We look at the Holocaust and see wicked men and women causing horrific acts in the name of God and country. Yet in the rest of the world even in the Jewish ghettos themselves, no one believed man was that evil. But God got the whole world's attention. Imagine for a minute if 14 million people followed 200,000, what would have occurred if the Holocaust had not existed? We think of pain and we become overwhelmed individually and collectively by its imprint. As I write this now my stones are gone but an RA flare up has put my right hip in horrible pain. Instead of the usual tantrums and sadness over the past few months I wait and see what God is protecting me from or showing me how to protect others. We have a choice to either become horribly selfish when pain happens to us and believe the world owes us for that suffering or we kick in those empathetic muscles and decide to unselfishly try and remove the suffering of others. Christ when He looked out over Jerusalem was grieved by what He saw. His solution endure physical pain to elevate pain. We live in a society that avoids pain at any cost and the church has even embraced this philosophy. We pray for the elevation of pain that requires no pain from us and all God's intervention. Paul used two Greek words for prayer one was deomai which meant to make one's needs known and to ask for intercession for those needs. This was not for God alone but for the church so that the church would be motivated by the Spirit to meet those needs. We may not be able to heal the sick but we can come along side someone, cook them a meal, simply be a friend. Instead we pray that it goes away because we think that is what's best, and never stop to imagine how we can contribute to reducing another individual's pain. When it doesn't go away I've seen people avoid, treat others differently, and futilely keep praying for relief that isn't coming. If we don't start believing that ending suffering begins with our own personal faith journey then we will be no better than the lost who asks why if there is a God isn't He stopping the suffering?

Dream Catcher

When I was visiting Erik and Stephanie Christensen in Arizona last year my husband and I went to the Grand Canyon. At a tower inside the park was a gift shop and I looked around for what to buy my three nieces. Dream catchers with bright colors caught my eye and I picked my nieces favorite colors. One of my nieces struggles with nightmares and was thrilled with the myth that the dream catcher would catch and keep her bad dreams. Even as adults we struggle with the issue of our dreams. As children we imagine a future that we want for ourselves and do everything possible to obtain that image in our heads. The problem is we cannot foresee every variable that we will meet along the way. As a child I didn't know if I wanted to be married and have kids. I played along with my friends without telling them I wasn't that thrilled about either prospect. I wanted to write fiction and compose music but no one my age liked either one of those dreams. As I grew up God taught me that if He doesn't define the dream we will live life in disappointment and regret. As a teenager I thought it would be cool to go to the Air Force Academy and talked and planned it out with my dad. He was so excited but then I found out that I wouldn't be able to get in because of my asthma. I was disappointed but after time I developed a new dream, to go to college get my degree in psychology and go on to pursue my masters and PhD. It took quite a good bit of my twenties just to finish my bachelor's degree and along the way I realized my health was continuing to deteriorate. The year I was to graduate my now husband asked me to marry him and I was stunned, not because he asked but because it had never been my dream. I was afraid because I wasn't sure it would make me happy. What I discovered was that God was asking me for my dream again to give me another dream. I said yes believing God was calling me to be married to Todd. Not long after we were married I became so ill I had to quit work and give up any hope of getting my masters or PhD. I was again disappointed because I thought my dream and my value were linked. For a long time I didn't have a dream. My husband and I knew God didn't call us to be parents and we accepted that without regret. I was learning in those years to let God make my dreams. I studied scripture, learning Greek and Hebrew. I learned how to talk to God and listen to what He had to say. Then my dream came, the one I had always thought about but never thought of as being a goal. I wanted to teach but more than that I wanted to disciple. So when my health got even worse and I had to drop out of choir and praise team, I wasn't disappointed but understood God was asking for that ministry to give me His ministry for me. It wasn't long after that I started working with Rita Carr and then SALT and finally discipling and teaching the way God had envisioned for me. Although marriage wasn't my dream God had other plans. Even though the norm was to have children, God said no. My identity is not defined by the dreams I have for myself but the one He has set aside just for me. I could have been the bratty child stomping my foot that God took away from me my goals in life but instead I learned that what He asks for isn't as valuable as what He wants to give me in its place.

Greek Word of the Week

Rhema-(4487) from rheo meaning to speak or make a statement. Rhema means specific words, or statements. In John 15:7 Jesus said they we are to abide in His rhema. Unfortunately it is translated as word. John 1:1 says that in the beginning was the word. Word here is actually logos which really means logic or reason. So word is used in two different places but are in reality two different Greek words. Matthew 4:4 Jesus quotes from Deuteronomy, saying that man cannot live by bread only but from every (rhema) that proceeds from the mouth of God. So what is the difference between rhema and logos then? Logos is the general expression of the thoughts of God while rhema is the specific subject matter or promises that God imparts. There are specific promises that God made to Abraham that dealt only with his descendants and those that only dealt with gentiles. But God's characteristics are the general logos that we must understand in order to accept and understand the specific. Jesus gave specific instructions to the apostles such as unconditionally love one another, unconditionally love your enemies, and trusting Him for salvation. But when He says Spirit, the God in John 4:24 He is stating what is logos or the general information about God. Both logos and rhema are meant to work together to show individuals what God wants us to know about Him. Does this require that we create a new vocabulary to let people know exactly what we mean? It actually might help to become more specific about what we quote so that other believers understand what is the specific and general information about God. It also reminds us what promises are to Israel and to the church so that we do not claim what isn't ours.

1 Thessalonians (heart/emotions)

Last time we looked at the soul and the first aspect the mind. So now let's examine the function of the kardia, the heart or emotions. We first see emotions in Adam in Genesis chapter two where God said it wasn't good for Adam to be alone. Loneliness is an emotion. Even before the fall this was characteristic of human beings. God gave us limited space and time which required us interacting with each other through other means. Emotions are not bad in and of themselves. We see that fear of death kept Adam and Eve from eating the fruit. They loved God and trusted Him and knew the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was dangerous to them. When the serpent took away their trust and made the tree safe did they eat from it. Emotions combine with information from the mind and spirit to make relationships bond. When we look at a sunset we take in visually what the sunset looks like but then our spirit is related to God through the idea of sunset but then we are overwhelmed by the concept of beauty. How does this happen? Our spirit trusts God created the sunset. Our mind is fascinated by the intricacies of the visual stimuli but our emotions take the information about the colors and how they fit together plus the relationship to God and our emotions produce, awe, love, and beauty which bonds us to God in that moment. Without emotions we wouldn't experience passion, affection, fear, compassion and intimacy with each other and with God. It is intriguing to me that a mother as soon as she finds out about life inside her is bonded to that life having never seen the child or held the child. We are bonded to each other through emotion. The apostles talk about the depth of tenderness for the churches and Paul talks about the kindred spirit he experienced with Timothy and Titus through their bond with Christ. Emotions are not the enemy but emotions can be used by the enemy. When someone questions the validity of a confession stating that it is emotional this can be dangerous. Emotions are part of who we are. If we trust something is true and are overwhelmed by the love that Christ has for us we will express it in some emotional way. We need to distinguish between a confession based on a group dynamic where the individual wanting the approval of the group comes forward or makes a decision and where there is no substance to their confession versus one based upon truth with emotional responses. We also need to refrain from judging others on their outward expression of gratitude toward God or their depth of devotion. Do some have an addiction to emotions? Yes. This is something that occurred before an individual comes to Christ. They let their emotions be the chief contributor of information to the will. So they live by fear, anger, avoidance of pain and addiction to infatuations. If they feel warm and fuzzy at a church service they perpetually seek that feeling instead of a more sustainable passion for God. Passion is different because it is the emotions under authority. When we have a passion for each other because of God that is positive and bonds us to God through Christ. Should we fear emotions? No in fact we need to have a healthy Christ centered attitude toward them. So God doesn't reject our sadness or anger He just wants us to trust Him so we don't do something out of anger, sadness or fear that is sin. When Job tore his clothes and wept for his children in Job 2:20 God says Job didn't sin with his lips. God knows we are going to mourn our sin, mourn the loss of people and possessions. He just doesn't want us to succumb to despair. So the emotions were never meant to take over the will but to compliment the mind and spirit. Many people act out of their emotions and blame it on their personalities. A person's personality is the totality of who they are not just what they say. If an individual runs at the mouth it is because their mind and emotions have control of their will and not the Spirit of God. God doesn't give us an out when it comes to change. Everything including what we say comes under the authority of God or else we grieve Him. Change from habitual emotional responses to Spirit controlled emotional bonding is difficult and requires conscious awareness of the process. It also requires strengthening the mind and that is where scripture ingestion can put our emotions in check and allow us to trust from a place of truth and not fear or anger.

1 Thessalonians 5:23 (soul)

I last entered a post about 1 Thessalonians 5:23 and discussed the aspect of the spirit and how it functions. The soul is a lot more complex. There are three parts to the soul: the mind (noos) the heart/emotions (kardia) and the will (boulomai). These three parts are often confused in Christian circles and I hope to show what they really were designed to do. You may have heard people say, "It didn't get from their head down to their heart" when explaining why some believers don't act on truth. Still a contradictory statement to this is the "willful child" scenario where a child or adult is referred to as willful when they stubbornly keep a course of action despite punishment or consequences. These both are incorrect and I will show why they are. Remember the spirit is the method by which God communicates to us and infuses power to our behavior. The spirit in us has to agree with God about anything He says and trust it before that information will travel to the mind. In many ways the mind and spirit function in tandum. Our spirit communicates trust of God's communication, the mind then evaluates that information and makes a compelling argument to the will to act upon that information. The mind is the faculty by which we observe, analysis and make relationships between pieces of information. Remember in John 14, Jesus promised the disciples that the Holy Spirit would bring back to their memory all that He had taught them. Memory here is hupomimnesko, meaning to bring back to one's mind. The mind is how we learn about things and people around us, store that information and build upon it. Our spirits translate faith to the mind so that the mind can store that information, use it and make the self understand it. Paul says in Romans 12:1 to metamorphoo, be changed from the inside out by the renewing of our minds. Changing our patterns of thinking is difficult but through faith managed by our spirit we can change how we think. When we trust God's character and who He is we encode that information into our minds and when a situation presents itself, the spirit translates faith to the mind which remembers who God is and persuades the will to act on the information the mind now possesses. This all happens in a split second. Because we don't make ourselves consciously aware of what is transpiring we often miss how to change how we think. Let me explain. The heart, (kardia) is the seat of emotions. Without the spirit having functioned as the head of the self for years, the emotions or heart give primal or irrational reactions to the environment around us. Many times our emotions have reactions that don't match the reality of the situation for instance being fearful of someone we love with no evidence that they are dangerous. In this crazy mix of emotions we can encode wrong emotional reactions to situations around us in our minds and with no evidence to override these emotions the will takes the more powerful argument. So the mind has to be empowered by the spirit to put the emotions and body under control so that the will can get the correct information from the Spirit. The mind is not something to be dismissed as in the first comment I mentioned. The will doesn't act without information either. If a person is stubborn it is because they trust something that may not be true or good for them. No one is actually willful but rather control by a bad influence whether it is their mind, their emotions or their body. We have to convince our minds of truth and once it is persuaded then it will persuade our wills to act accordingly. If the spirit within us in under control of the Spirit of Christ then it will order the mind, emotions, body and will so that a chain of order is consistently kept. This is what 1 Thessalonians 5:23 was talking about. I will post an entry on the heart another time.

1 Thessalonians 5:23

One of the verses Dr. Zodhiates hammered into Erik Christensen and me was this verse. Paul says, "And may the God of peace Himself set you apart completely, and your whole spirit, soul and body be kept blameless until the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." This verse had to do with how the Greek's viewed the entire individual and how it was divided up. In oriental philosophy there was the outer man and inner man. In Greek thought the individual was made up of three components, the spirit, soul and body. In this post I will deal with the spirit and what the Bible and the Greeks believed. The Greeks had a temple at Delphi devoted to the god Apollo. The high priestess was a young girl who would seek Apollo's answers to the questions pilgrims would bring to her. At the base of the statue of Apollo in the temple was a crack in the earth on which the temple was built. In this fissure ether was emitted. This gas would intoxicate the high priestess and she would give answers that had to be interpreted by one of the priests. The Greeks believed there had to be a device within man by which the gods could communicate to men. They called this pneuma, or spirit. Pneuma literally means breathe or gas. This ability to communicate with the Divine, Jews adopted and translated into their own culture. In Genesis 2:7 the Hebrew text says that man was made into a living being, the Septuagint, uses psuche which means soul. We know from John 4:24 that God is Spirit and that what He breathed into Adam was life and part of that life was spirit. So what is the function of pneuma? Ephesians 2:1 tells us, "You were dead in your trespasses and sins". After the fall the spirit was rendered inactive. So what was the spirit like before the fall? In Genesis 3:8 it says that Adam and Eve had the ability to hear God walking through the garden. Genesis 2:15-17 tells us that God communicated openly and audibly with Adam and Eve. He also had interaction with them as they were in their physical form. So the spirit could communicate with with God but how did it interact with the other parts of the individual? Ephesians tells us that the spirit was inactive. Jude 10 calls the individuals invading the church as natural or that which is related to the body. Luke 12:19-21, 1 Peter 2:11 and Matthew 11:29 are some of the verses that show once the spirit was inactive something happened to the body and soul. They began to fight for control of an aspect of the soul, the will. So the spirit before the fall was the chief authority of the individual because the connection between the individual spirit and God was never severed. But when Adam and Eve ate the piece of fruit they broke the connection and immediately saw their nakedness and that God would be coming to be with them. The soul and body took over because their spirits had been rendered inactive. Without a central authority chaos takes over. Information then becomes the crucial point of contention. God communicates to us giving us spiritual food by which to base our decisions to act upon. If our information is solely based on what we can see in the physical world or imagine, or what we feel at the moment or what needs our body projects we act on what is the strongest persuasive information given to our will. So when our spirits are rendered active by the Spirit of God through Christ then a central authority is installed again. But the battle for control over the will still exists with a fourth player, the spirit involved. One of the reasons why our hearts are not the focal point of ingested scripture is because the heart is the seat of emotion not of reason or intellect. We can agree with God's communication to us and feel a connection toward Him but it is the actions of the spirit strongly overriding the natural mind, heart and body to control the will that is the seat of acceptance. It is not a matter of going from our heads to our heart but rather does our spirit trust the information God has given to us to persuade our will to act accordingly. We'll look at the mind and heart later but it is important to understand that the spirit has to be convinced first of what God is communicating through His Spirit to us. Without faith it is impossible to please God and it is illogical to have a clean clear communication with Him as well. Sometimes, depending on our faith, we hear half of what God is saying to us because we stop trusting somewhere in the conversation. When that happens we are vulnerable to our natural mind, heart and body. Many Christians confuse their clear communication from God with their fleshly faculties. You see believers tolerating others who are involved in sin because they only heard unconditionally love one another but didn't finish the communication in that if we catch a brother in sin we have an obligation in that love to restore them. If we keep a clear line open consistently, we consistently hear from God the whole message. This is the reason for growth and progress, because faith is a journey and not an automatic thing for us. Using the spirit within us as often as we are challenged to by scripture we learn to trust God and the more we trust the clearer the connection becomes and the more powerful we are to affect our wills.

The Tongue

One of the things I would like to do with this blog is not just talk about what is going on in my life but to make people think instead. Being a woman, one of the things I have had to endure in church and in the secular world is how other women use their tongues. We as believers have come to accept the gossip and tongue lashing that we overhear or are told directly without admonishing the individual doing the gossiping or tongue lashing. Gossip wrapped in prayer requests or fained concern cannot hide from God the true intent, to pass on information because we believe others should know what we know. James 3:1-12 goes into great detail about the tongue and more importantly how teachers and the mature behave with their tongues. In verse 3 James says, "Behold we put bits in the mouths of horses for them to obey us; and we turn about their whole body." James tells us that a teacher has to have this ability so that they control what they say and when they say things to others. A mature believer thinks before he or she speaks and never chases rabbits so that they can be carried off unknowingly in dangerous heretical territory. A teacher also must understand the importance and preciousness of trust. If a believer tells a friend's or even an acquaintance's business to someone else they show by their action that trust is cheap to them and of no value. Having lost that trust, close relationships break down. Over the years I have been told secrets and have been entrusted with them to keep and nurture a bond that a gossip cannot enjoy. I have however been told information about others and passed it on myself only to regret it as soon as I allowed that information to pass my lips. As I grew up I learned to be bold enough to stop the individual, ignore them or change the subject. Second hand information is often wrong or misleading and can create horrible stories that are not true. Another lesson about gossip is how people manipulate others to get information out of them. They tell what they know in hopes that the other person will "fill in the blanks". This kind of self importance and selfishness leads to the destruction of reputations, bad feelings between friends and rifts in the body. Men are not innocent of these charges either but are not as interested as women. If women don't teach that it's wrong it will be passed on to future generations with terrible consequences.

Where's the Beef?

Talking to my Greek students tonight about Hebrews 5:11-14. The author of Hebrews explains that the immature need milk but the mature need meat. So what is meat really? It has like spiritual maturity, become subjective instead of objective. The author of Hebrews was trying to give an in depth exegesis about Melchizedek being a type of Christ but he had to stop due to the immaturity of his audience. He then tells us in chapter six what isn't meat, repentance from dead works faith toward God, instruction about washings and laying on of hands, resurrection from the dead and eternal judgement. So if these topics are not meat what is? The author of Hebrews gives us principles that can help us to identify meat. First do they provide God's logic concerning justice? The immature is unaccustomed to this. So what is God's logic concerning justice? Jesus tells us in John 13 and 15 that we are to unconditionally love one another. Jesus also tells us if struck to turn the other cheek, if someone asks to borrow something give it to them and not ask for it back, and unconditionally love your enemies. These principles when taught from scripture are not milk and require someone who has experience with spiritual things to understand them. The author of Hebrews also said the mature put God's logic of justice into daily practice. Paul said in Romans 6 we are to constantly present ourselves as weapons of righteousness which requires practice. He says in 1 Corinthians 9:27 that he disciplines his body to make it his slave so he wouldn't be disqualified when he preached. The author of Hebrews says that in this practice the senses are being trained to know the difference between good and evil. Here in the Greek it is kalos, God's characteristic best and kakos, corrupted or subtle evil. In other words the mature who feeds on meat needs what is going to heighten his senses to detect the distinction between the best God has for us and the good man settles for. The good as Voltaire once said is the enemy of the best. The mature understand that obvious sin is what the immature should recognize. However, meat the mature feed on goes much deeper to equip them to recognize the good which is the poor imitation of God's best. Recognizing the corrupt they can pursue God's best and put it into practice. So meat must equip, it must be deeper in content, and it must connect more intimately with Christ. Once a mature believer consumes steak they know the difference between steak and meatloaf. This ability gives the mature even more refined skills and produces the characteristics of Christ in that believer. So the question becomes is the modern church providing meat or is it passing tofu off as meat?

Ministry

One of the difficulties in having a chronic illness is being involved in a ministry. My first ministry is to my husband. I've learned how to make sure the outside ministries I am involved in doesn't impact my time with Todd. He appreciates that I consider him and that at this time I'm not gone every night. Having a good relationship with my husband makes it much easier to minister to others. When I finally got to the point I needed to quit work I replaced school and work with study and investing in my relationship with Christ. That investment paid off in a big way. God had created in me a desire to disciple and teach as a full time ministry instead of the music ministry I was in. I knew that a choice would have to be made because the time demands of the music ministry weren't flexible. I made the transition a lot easier than I imagined and have never regretted the decision I made. Friends and people I met over the years became apart of my classes and became discipleship relationships. God gave me a ministry that dealt with growing and equipping individuals who longed for more of Christ. The flexibility of this ministry allows for my health issues when they arise. When I hear healthy women with families complain that they have no time to minister to others I am somewhat unsympathetic. We all make priorities in our lives and if family comes before God and before the unconditional love of others, family becomes the thing we devote our lives to. Often time management with little ones and house duties becomes the issue. Often the husband doesn't see his wife's relationship with Christ as his concern. If he does he may only allow time alone with God when it's convenient to him. The guilt placed upon women is tremendous in the church to focus solely on their families. There is so much imput from outside voices who have different opinions on how much time to devote to family that it can become fleshly instead of Spirit. There needs to be a balance so that God can lead us to minister to those around us. Ministry does not have to be an organized thing. Jesus says in Mark 12:31 to "unconditionally love your neighbor as yourself". Ministry can be anyone who crosses your path. Family can be a ministry but it shouldn't be a woman's only ministry. Pricilla and Aquila were a good example of a married couple who worked as a team to host a church in their house, disciple and evangelize wherever they were. As an individual with a chronic illness, I know the reality of limitations. Being married I understand the demands of family but my weaknesses God can use for His purposes if I seek to be used. This is not meant as a guilt trip, because the Spirit doesn't run off false guilt in us, however Hebrews 10:24 calls us to light a fire under each other to good works.

Greek Word of the Week

Hupotasso-(5293) from hupo, under and tasso, to place in order, together they mean to place under according to the order established. Unfortunately due to cultural and political views the English translation is submission instead of the real definition. Hupotasso was a military term that meant soldiers acted in accordance to the ranking system under which they served. A general made decisions and the colonel followed those decisions but the colonel could make lesser decisions and pass them on to the major and so on and so forth. A soldier respects the rank of higher ranking officers and takes orders trusting the general knows what he is doing. In the same way Paul and others use this word. The centurion in Matthew 8:5 illustrates hupotasso telling Jesus not to come to his house but to just say the word and his servant would be healed. The centurion explained that just as he commanded troops below him in rank so could Jesus. If we understand how God set up the order of authority, we have the choice to place ourselves in that order or be rebellious. If we accept that order we are trusting God, not man for the outcome. In the church God placed elders and apostles over the churches themselves. Paul and Barnabas in Acts 13:1-4 show believers who waited until the leaders of the church sent them out instead of appointing themselves and thumbing their noses at God's order. Diotrephes in 3 John however shows the resistance of hupotasso choosing to reject the apostles and elders in Jerusalem in favor of his own authority. In Ephesians 5:22 and Colossians 3:18 Paul tells wives to be "hupotasso" to their husbands. Here Paul is not saying wives are to be mindless slaves or to obey everything their husbands tell them to. Instead Paul is saying that a wife who recognizes her husband was placed as the head of the family, has the final decision and if she defies his decision because it isn't what she wanted to do she has stepped outside of the order God set up. It is interesting that Peter tells us in 1 Peter 3 that if her husband is disobedient to scripture she is to win him with her respectful behavior. If however he orders her to do something that is contrary to God's standards such as prostitution, abusing children, murder etc. She can respectfully refuse to do so. Esther is a good example of this. She knew she had to defy her husband's degree in order to save her people but she did it in a respectful way. In addition to wives, scripture talks about our behavior to authority within the church and to government. In 1 Peter 2:13 Peter says that we are to be "hupotasso" to every governing body because God said so. God doesn't give us an out if we dislike the governing ruler. As long as they don't require us to do anything against God we are to place ourselves under its authority. The same is true of elders and pastors. 1 Peter 5:1-5 tells us that younger men are to be "hupotasso" to the elders. Unfortunately this has been translated as older men but the context is about elders and elders were supposed to be older men in the faith as well as chronologically. God set them up to lead the church. They were to have a vision for the church and to feed the church, by equipping them for that vision. In many cases sheep stray on various things and a shepherd has to bring them back in. Resisting their authority is resisting their God given responsibility to protect and feed us. Lastly Ephesians 5:23 and 1 Peter 5:5 makes the statement to be "hupotasso" to each other. If we are given an order by God of authority whether it be parents, bosses, teachers, mentors, heads of ministries etc., we are to accept that order instead of complaining and being rebellious. This attitude then allows God to work in us so that we accept His authority most of all. If an individual is rebellious to elders and pastors, to government, parents, husbands and bosses then how will they be willing to accept God's authority? This little word has a big meaning that shows both spiritual maturity and deep faith.

2 Corinthians 12:7-10

For those of you who struggle with chronic pain I think you will relate with my story. Years ago when I was being plagued with Rheumatoid attacks I would find myself crying unable to lie down, stand up or sit for more than a few minutes at a time. My clothes hurt as they touched my skin and my entire body felt as though I was on fire. My husband couldn't sit beside me because any movement of the bed hurt. He couldn't hug me because of the terrible pain of my skin and soft tissue. He would sit on the floor by my bed with his head in his hands because he couldn't take the pain away and he had no way of comforting me. In those days all we could do was talk. You find out who you are when you are in pain for more than a day or a few hours. At first you can mentally handle it. I hate narcotics because they take away my ability to focus on resisting the pain. After two or three days my mind would become tired and my nerves frayed. I didn't want to be around anyone because I knew my quick irritation was difficult to manage and I didn't want to lose relationships. Todd and I often fought over stupid things because I needed space to deal with the pain and well husbands think space means emotional distance. I would study during those times because when my mind was clear. Distraction was all I had left when medicine, ice packs and heating pads had failed. One passage I kept finding intriguing was 2 Corinthians 12:7-, "in order that I might not choose to exalt myself, a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan in order that he might beat me so that I would not exalt myself." This verse is controversial among scholars but I knew that God is in charge of interpretations and there had to be something out there to give me the clear meaning of "a thorn in the flesh". I found it on a Greek website, a university project that showed me other examples of the Greek word skolops, translated as thorn, other places in classic literature. In Homer and other places skolops was not a pesky little thorn it was a stake the Persians most notably drove through their enemies and left them there to die a slow painful death. In the Septuagint (Greek translation of the OT) this word was also used and in the same fashion. Imagine then a stake in the flesh. You get the picture. Now many doubt this is in reference to pain but Paul uses the word sarx, which means flesh. This phrase is only used in classic literature to describe terrible physical pain. Paul then had a painful affliction which he asked God three times to take away. This thorn in flesh Paul says was a messenger of Satan meant to beat Paul up. Just as God allowed Satan to bring physical suffering in Job's life, He did so in Paul's. Paul realizes after the third plea God's intent was unchangeable. He could have been angry at God and lashed out at everyone around him but Paul trusts God's judgment in the matter. That is hard to do, to trust someone in the middle of terrible pain, knowing they will not take it away. In Paul's case there was an underlying characteristic God didn't want to interfere in Paul's life. So pain made Paul and God talk when nothing else could ease Paul's pain and here was the outcome, "And He said to me, 'My grace is exceedingly great for you'; for this reason My power in physical weakness keeps maturing you. Therefore rather I sweetly will boast in my physical weaknesses in order that Christ's power may overshadow me." Paul wasn't being super spiritual he was learning daily the lesson that Christ's grace was meant to make us fly not just walk and when we think physical weakness makes us unusable God begs to differ. Will I make mistakes, cry, be tempted to give up? I will always have those things in my life trying to beat me up but in the end I can choose to fly or crawl.

Greek Word of the Week

Praotes-(4236) from praos, which is often translated as meek but that English word doesn't capture the true meaning. This noun means to understand God's sovereignty and act accordingly. In this relationship the individual is in constant communication with God to know how to react to people at any given moment. Just as Christ reacted differently to different people so do we. Gentleness to some, standing up to others. Only God knows how individuals will respond to the treatment of others. Because of this we cannot depend solely on the external to know how to react so we must rely entirely on God's estimation of the individual. This important characteristic is the goal of spiritual maturity and the model by which the church was to replicate themselves. Galatians 5:23 lists praotes with self control (egkrateia 1466) and after faith (pistis 4102). Ephesians 4:2 lists praotes as a characteristic along with humility (tapeinophrosune 5012) and bearing up under people (makrothumia 3115) so that the end goal is eagerness to keep watch over the unity of the Spirit. Other passages Colossians 3:12-15, 1 Timothy 6:11, 2 Timothy 2:24-26, 2 Corinthians 10:1-5. Look at these and see what other characteristics and circumstances praotes is associated with.

This Rocks

I haven't blogged oh in some time and thought I might get back to it. The past month has been a series of kidney stones and infections. There were days I was so exhausted from not being able to get good sleep that I identified with the detainees at Gitmo except no one is trying to get information out of me. The pain and the fatigue have made it difficult to function and stripped pleasure right out of the equation. That moment when a stone passes and for a day the pain stops is indescribable. There is this tangible move from pain to relief and that become my single source of enjoyment. Movies, television, the computer all fade and seem empty. I have known what it was like to travel, to sing in front of audiences, to have songs recorded, to have riden roller coasters and to have danced but all those things have become either difficult for me or can no longer be done. In the end these too are empty and without satisfaction. I understand what Solomon wrote in Ecclesiates when he said that all was vainity. Vainity means in the original Hebrew emptiness, a waste of valuable time. The Epicurians mistakenly were lumped in with the Hedonists in Greek philosophy and this mistake has explained a great deal of what Solomon. Hedonists believed that pain was to be avoided at any cost. Epicurians believed that there was no afterlife and that we should enjoy the time we have here on earth with no thought to a cosmic judge. Solomon tells us that both these ideas end in the consumption of pleasure but still produce pain and that pain is emptiness. When I was a child going to my grandmother's house meant a weekend of gorging. I was so happy to get home to feel hungry again. What we don't understand is that without pain we can never know the sensation of pleasure. Just as the stone passing allowed me to truly appreciate what it was to be without a stone, so pain in my life teaches me a sense of appreciation for the simple things that appear when pain is gone. In the end the only enduring satisfaction is God who makes our physical existence of both pain and pleasure turn upside. What we think is pain cements our passion for lasting things and what we think is pleasure addicts us to things that are empty and fleeting. In these past few weeks I knew as I always know that God wanted me still to hear specific instructions that were important for the days and years ahead. I could curse Him for the pain and discomfort or bless Him for the message.