Tag: Paul

Posted on

What is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

1 Corinthians 12

12The human body has many parts, but the many parts make up only one body. So it is with the body of Christ. 13Some of us are Jews, some are Gentiles, some are slaves, and some are free. But we have all been baptized into Christ’s body by one Spirit, and we have all received the same Spirit. (1 Corinthians 12:12-13, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

It’s a sad reality that many Christians know next to nothing about the Holy Spirit.

I grew up in a baptist tradition and while I had heard of the Holy Spirit, I don’t ever recall a sermon or message teaching on the role or ministry of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer.

When I recommitted myself to Christ in college, I got involved in Campus Crusade for Christ and someone shared a booklet with me that explained the ministry of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer, specifically, how I, as a Christian, could be FILLED with the Spirit. (I wrote about what it means to be filled with the Spirit in my blog post “Under the Influence”).

I had been a Christian for 13 years but really had no clue as to how the Holy Spirit could empower me as a believer to live a full and abundant Christian life. This was primarily because of a theological gap that existed between more conservative/fundamentalist traditions like the one I had been raised in, and the more charismatic/Pentecostal traditions regarding the role of the Holy Spirit in the modern church and in the life of the believer.

The charismatic and Pentecostal traditions seemed to over-emphasize the Holy Spirit, with what seemed to many as an extreme emphasis on the gifts of the Spirit in the daily life of the Christian, while the more fundamentalist traditions, many of which taught that the miraculous gifts of tongues and healing were no longer active in the church (a view known as “cessationism”) seemed to ignore the Holy Spirit altogether.

In the 1970’s, with the spread of the Jesus movement, churches like Calvary Chapel created a sort of doctrinal middle ground, helping to bridge the theological gap that existed between the charismatic arm of the church and the more fundamentalist arm of the church. The net result is that over the last 50 years or so, there has been a renewed interest and emphasis on the Holy Spirit within theological traditions that, in the past, had seemingly neglected the Holy Spirit.

Still, despite the fact that the Holy Spirit is no longer seen as just a topic among charismatic believers, I’ve found that the ministry of the Holy Spirit is still a mystery to many Christians. In particular, one of the most confusing concepts for evangelicals related to the Holy Spirit is the baptism of the Spirit.

Many associate the baptism of the Spirit with a charismatic experience because many of the charismatic traditions have taught that the baptism of the Spirit is a second blessing bestowed upon believers that gives them access to the signs and wonders gifts such as tongues, healings, miracles, etc.

This is not what Paul taught regarding the baptism of the Spirit as this passage in 1 Corinthians 12 demonstrates.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

The context of this passage is spiritual gifts. There was a lot of confusion and chaos in the Corinthian church because spiritual gifts were being used improperly, causing disruption and disorder within the church worship service.

Paul is writing this passage to explain the proper use of the different gifts.

He compares the diversity of gifts to a human body. Just as a body has many parts that make up the one body, so the Spirit distributes many different gifts to the members of the one church.

Paul has already made the point that nobody has ALL the gifts and nobody should seek any specific gift.

We are all different and we have different gifts.

BUT.

Why the but?

What is the contrast Paul is trying to make?

We’re all different and we all have different gifts BUT there is ONE way in which we are all the same.

We ALL have been baptized by the Spirit.

According to Paul, the Holy Spirit baptizes ALL believers into the body.

What exactly does that mean?

It means that even though believers get different spiritual gifts, we all get the same Holy Spirit, who baptizes, or identifies us as being part of the body of Christ.

In other words, being baptized by the Spirit is our initiation into the family of God.

The Holy Spirit joins us to the body of Christ and we become a part of the family of God (see John 1:12). The Holy Spirit is our seal (see my post “The Holy Spirit as a Seal”) and our pledge (see my post “The Holy Spirit as a Deposit”) showing that we belong to Christ. It’s like the brand of cattle. It shows ownership. The Holy Spirit, in a way, is like our new family “crest”.

The tense of the verb indicates that this baptism Paul is speaking of is a past action, which means that it is something all believers (even carnal ones) have experienced.

This means that the baptism of the Spirit is not a religious experience that some Christians encounter at some point after coming to faith, giving them the ability to speak in tongues and perform other miraculous signs and wonders. The baptism of the Spirit is something that is common to ALL believers. It’s the moment at which the believer becomes identified with God’s Spirit, uniting them to Christ and ushering them into the family of God (see my post “What is Baptism?”).

Paul says that this baptism, this union, happens at the moment of belief in Christ. In that instant, everything changes. We become adopted sons and daughters in God’s family. We have a new life and a new identity, along with the promise of eternal life.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What is the theological tradition in which you were raised? What did. your tradition teach about the role of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer?

What do you think are some of the disadvantages of being involved in a tradition that does not emphasize or teach much regarding the nature and ministry of the Holy Spirit?

What do you think are some disadvantages of being involved in a tradition that emphasizes the necessity of the signs and wonders gifts in the every day life of believers?

What do you believe about the baptism of the Spirit? What do you think it means? 

How does one come to a biblical understanding of the Holy Spirit and the role of the Spirit while avoiding the dangers of theological extremism?

 

Photo by Mateus Campos Felipe on Unsplash

Posted on

Is Baptism a Part of the Gospel Message?

1 Corinthians 1

10I appeal to you, brothers,] in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11My brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas’”; still another, “I follow Christ.”

13Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into the name of Paul? 14I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. 16(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power. (1 Corinthians 1:10-17, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

What is required for salvation?

That’s a basic question that every religious system should be able to answer.

Traditional Christianity says that salvation comes to those who place their faith in Jesus, who died on a cross to pay the penalty that we deserve for our sins.

However, there are some within the Christian tradition who hold to the view that baptism is an essential step in the salvation process. So in addition to believing in Jesus, one must also be physically baptized, with water, in order to be fully saved.

Is this true? Does one need to be baptized in order to be saved?

I think this passage in 1 Corinthians gives us some insight to address this question.

The context of this passage is that Paul is addressing some problems in the Corinthian church that were creating divisions.

The source of these divisions is that people in the church were aligning themselves with different leaders. I wrote about this passage and the divisions that we can experience in my blog post  “Name Dropping in the Early Church”, as well as my post, “Political Divisions within the Church”.

What’s interesting about this passage, though, is that Paul, while addressing the divisions that were occurring in the church, tangentially speaks to the issue of baptism.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

The source of the divisions is that people in the church were aligning themselves with various leaders. These leaders were becoming the central figure for each faction instead of Jesus being the central figure for the whole church. So in essence, you had the Paul faction, the Apollos faction, the Cephas faction and so on.

Paul’s argument is that Jesus isn’t divided. Therefore, his church shouldn’t be divided into factions of people who are identifying with certain popular figures. Instead, the church should be united with everyone identifying with and following Jesus.

To make his case, Paul asks a number of rhetorical questions:

Was Paul crucified for you? (Obviously, the answer is NO)

Were you baptized into the name of Paul? (Again, the answer is obviously NO)

Paul then makes an interesting statement. He says that he is thankful that he didn’t baptize many of the Corinthians. He is glad about that because then they could not claim to have been baptized into Paul’s name. Paul did not want believers making him more important than Jesus.

This begs the question: if baptism is essential for salvation, why would Paul be thankful and glad that he didn’t baptize many people? Wouldn’t he be sad that he hadn’t been able to save many people?

Paul completes his thought with the following statement:

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel

it’s easy to gloss over this statement but what’s important is the fact that Paul is claiming that his goal, his mandate, was to preach the gospel.

A question I have often asked people when engaging in this discussion:

If a person responds to the gospel, will they be saved?

I think most Christians would agree that the gospel message contains everything that is necessary for a person to become saved if they respond positively to the message.

In fact, Paul, n Romans 1:16-17 says,

I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. 17For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.

According to Paul, the gospel “is the power of God unto salvation.”

Now if the gospel message saves people and Paul says that he was sent by Christ to preach the gospel and NOT baptize people, then clearly, baptism is NOT a part of the salvation message, which means it is NOT necessary for a person to be saved.

This does not mean that baptism is not important or that there isn’t some significance to it. There is. It’s just not necessary to be saved.

To learn more about what baptism is and its significance to the Christian, please read the following related posts:

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What do you think are the essential elements of the gospel message? 

If baptism is necessary for salvation why does Paul say that Jesus did not send him to baptize but to preach the gospel?

If baptism is NOT necessary for salvation, what is the purpose? Why is it practiced?

In verse 13, Paul asks the question, “were you baptized into the name of Paul?” What do you think that means? What does it mean to be baptized “into the name” of another person? How does this understanding of the word “baptize” shed light on the issue of whether baptism is necessary for salvation or not?

 

Photo by Alex Shute on Unsplash

Posted on

Did Paul Predict an Apostasy in Which the Church Would be Completely Lost?

2 Thessalonians 2

1Concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered to him, we ask you, brothers, 2not to become easily unsettled or alarmed by some prophecy, report or letter supposed to have come from us, saying that the day of the Lord has already come. 3Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. 4He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.

5Don’t you remember that when I was with you I used to tell you these things? 6And now you know what is holding him back, so that he may be revealed at the proper time. 7For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. 8And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendor of his coming. 9The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with the work of Satan displayed in all kinds of counterfeit miracles, signs and wonders, 10and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness. (2 Thessalonians 2:1-13, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

Not long ago, I was engaged in an online conversation with a Mormon who was explaining the necessity and legitimacy of the Mormon church.

You can read about the larger context that prompted this discussion in my blog post “Should People Take the Mormon Challenge?”

If you’re not familiar with Mormonism, you should know that it is not just another of the many Christian denominations that exist. It is something entirely different from the traditional Christianity that is represented by the many mainline Christian denominations and traditions.

Mormonism was founded in 1830 by Joseph Smith, who, according to his testimony, was confused by the many different Christian denominations in place at the time. He sought to determine which one was right so he could know which one he should follow.

Joseph Smith claims that he received a revelation directly from God the Father and Jesus, in which he was told that NONE of the denominations were correct and that he should not follow any of them.

Supposedly, Joseph Smith was later directed by an angel to some buried golden plates, which were subsequently translated into “The Book of Mormon”.  Not long after, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormonism) was formed as the re-establishment of the true church that had allegedly been lost ever since the original apostles died off.

Interestingly, Mormonism today seeks to be known as “Christian” even though all of the Christian denominations of today were apparently labeled by Jesus himself as wrong.

Naturally, most Christians today do not think that they’re wrong, nor do they believe that they have fallen off the path, as Joseph Smith maintains that Jesus told him.

Hence, there is genuine debate regarding the origins of Mormonism and the truthfulness of its claims.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

A key argument that Mormons make to support their claim that Jesus visited Joseph Smith is the assertion that the original New Testament church fell into apostasy and the original church teachings and church authority were lost….for nearly 1800 years!

This passage in 2 Thessalonians is often used as one proof text to assert that Paul himself predicted that the church would fall into apostasy.

If the church indeed fell into apostasy and it can be demonstrated that even the apostles knew this would happen, then the idea that Jesus would appear at some point to someone to re-establish the true church seems at least plausible, if not inevitable.

Unfortunately, there are quite a number of problems with the Mormon teaching on this passage as it relates to their view of a universal and cataclysmic apostasy of the church.

First of all, how does one reconcile the Mormon view that the church fell into apostasy and was lost with Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 16, in which he said that he would establish his church and the gates of hell would not prevail against it? Jesus taught that nothing could ultimately eliminate his church. Yet Mormons teach that the gates of hell could prevail against Christ’s church and indeed DID prevail….for nearly 1800 years!

Secondly, if the church DID fall into apostasy and was completely lost (which we assert is not possible according to Jesus), why would Jesus wait 1800 years to re-establish His church? That’s an awfully long time with a lot of lost people who ultimately had no hope, given the complete absence of the church.

Third, Mormons make the interpretive error of eisegesis (reading their preferred interpretation into the text) when they assume that passages which warn of false teachers and ideologies are evidence of a universal apostasy in which the church would be lost. While Jesus and the apostles often warned of false teachers and frequently pointed to our sinful tendencies to pursue worldly desires at the expense of following Christ and obeying His Great Commission, there are NO passages where Jesus or any of his apostles predict that the universal church and its teachings would be completely lost.

Finally, this passage in 2 Thessalonians 2 is offered up as one of several primary passages that speak to this alleged apostasy. According to Mormon teaching, Jesus, Paul and others all KNEW that the church would fall into apostasy and spoke openly about it.

The problem for Mormons is that this passage says nothing about the church being lost, nor does it even hint that there would be a universal apostasy shortly after the apostles left the scene. In short, this passage doesn’t teach what Mormons say it teaches.

It’s clear from the very first verse of this chapter that Paul is speaking about the 2nd coming of Christ. Paul had taught the Thessalonians about this subject on many occasions, as he states in verse 5.

The Thessalonians were confused about the timing of the 2nd coming and were anxious because of false reports coming from would-be prophets and random itinerant preachers who claimed that the day of the Lord had already occurred.

The Thessalonians were worried that perhaps they had missed the big day and had been left behind. Paul assures them that the “day of the Lord”, which refers to the 2nd coming of Christ, had NOT happened yet and would not happen until certain visible and identifiable events had taken place.

Paul lists these events, including the “man of lawlessness” entering the temple and calling himself god.

This event clearly has not happened yet and when it does happen, it will not lead to an apostasy of the church as Mormons claim, but it will lead to the 2nd coming of Christ as is clear from verse 1.

Since it’s clear from the text that the events Paul is talking about are STILL future events, this passage cannot be legitimately offered up as evidence that the church was lost shortly after the apostles died off and therefore needed to be restored nearly 1800 years later.

The truth is, there is no evidence that the church of the New Testament was ever lost. Sure, there have been many within the church who have been led to follow a path of false teachings. That has always been the case. Even in the time of the apostles we see that there were many false teachers and many false teachings. We even see devout disciples who are led astray. But none of this proves that the church as a whole was fully and fundamentally lost.

Additionally, there is no evidence that the New Testament church’s teachings and structure resembled anything remotely mirroring the current Mormon church.

The New Testament documents are fairly well preserved and we can trace the traditions and the teachings of not only the apostles but the early church fathers. Historically, we can trace theological heresies as well as denominational splinter groups. We can compare all of it with the teachings of the New Testament to determine what is accurate and what is not.

Mormonism wants you to believe that Jesus told Joseph Smith that all the Christian denominations were wrong and that Mormonism is right.

The problem is that we cannot verify that Joseph Smith ever had a real encounter with Jesus, but we can evaluate Mormon teachings to those of Jesus and the New Testament apostles. By that metric, Mormonism fails because it teaches a gospel message that is in stark contrast to that which we know was taught by Jesus and his disciples.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

Mormons claim that this passage teaches a universal apostasy of the church shortly after the apostles died off. Based on the plain reading of the text, do you agree that this is what Paul is teaching? Why or why not?

Mormons say that church authority and structure were lost when the church fell into apostasy. Yet Jesus taught that the gates of hell could not prevail against His church. How does one ultimately determine which view is correct? What standards or protocols do you think are needed to evaluate the veracity of each sides’ claims?

We have a record of Jesus’ teachings and the teachings of many of His disciples. We call this the New Testament. Do you think the New Testament has been accurately preserved? In other words, do you believe that the New Testament is an accurate reflection of the account of Jesus’ life and ministry as well as an accurate account of the New Testament church and its teachings? What are the reasons for the position you hold?

If the church did fall into apostasy and was completely lost as Mormons claim, when and where did the “man of lawlessness” event take place? To what is Paul referring to?

Paul says that “the secret power of lawlessness is already at work”? What is Paul referring to? What does that mean? Paul also says that “the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way.” Who do you think is the one who now holds back the secret power of lawlessness?

 

Image created by Grok

Posted on

What is Baptism?

Romans 6

1What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

5If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. 6For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin— 7because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.

8Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9For we know that since Christ was raised from the dead, he cannot die again; death no longer has mastery over him. 10The death he died, he died to sin once for all; but the life he lives, he lives to God.

11In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. (Romans 6:1-11, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

Is baptism necessary for salvation?

This is the question I posed in a recent post of the same title.

My prompt for delving into this topic was a recent online conversation I had with a Mormon, who, in making his case for the legitimacy and necessity of the Mormon church, had made the claim that the Bible teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation.

Mormons teach that a great apostasy occurred shortly after the apostles died and the authoritative line for administering baptisms was lost….for nearly 1800 years! (I’ll address this theological error in a different post.) But fortunately, according to Mormonism, Jesus supposedly restored the priestly line and authority for baptisms through Joseph Smith and the Mormon church.

I argued in my post “Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?” that those who hold to this view, that baptism is necessary for salvation, often have an inaccurate understanding of what baptism is.

Many have an understanding of baptism that is informed only by their own religious experience. Hence, they think that any time the word appears in the Bible, it must be referring to the act of immersing someone in water for some efficacious religious purpose, i.e. cleansing of their sins and completing the salvation process.

But the meaning of the word “baptism” is broader than our own religious experience dictates and is often used in the Bible in ways that have nothing to do with any kind of immersive water experience.

So what is baptism exactly?

This passage in Romans is one of the clearest in terms of helping us understand exactly what baptism is and how it was understood by the apostles.

Specifically, there are two parallel statements that give clarification regarding what baptism is.

Verse 3 says, “don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?”

But verse 5 says, “If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection.”

Clearly, these two parallel verses demonstrate that to be “baptized into Christ and his death” is to be “united with Christ and His death.”

Hence, baptism is union with Christ.

This fits exactly with the broader biblical meaning of the word “baptize” which is identification. 

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

Paul is saying that when one identifies with Christ, they are identified with His death. This is exactly what the gospel teaches. When a person receives Jesus as their Lord and Savior, they experience a change in identity. Instead of being a person who is alienated and separated from God, the new believer enters into a union with Christ that is characterized by a new family relationship – they are now a child of God – an adopted son or daughter.

This new identity takes place at the moment a person believes in Jesus. They receive forgiveness precisely because they are united with Jesus in His death. Simply put, when a person receives Jesus, they are indicating that they want Jesus’ death to pay for their sins instead of having to pay the penalty for their sins on their own, which leads to judgment and eternal death.

Jesus’ death now counts for the believer. His death pays for all their sins and as a result, they experience complete and total forgiveness.

Those who hold to baptismal regeneration (the belief that baptism by immersion is necessary for salvation) might argue that this new identity doesn’t happen until a person is baptized with water by immersion.

But this contradicts what Scripture teaches, which is that a person is justified by faith alone and that believers receive the Holy Spirit (the sign that we are now members of God’s family) at the moment of belief, not at the moment of being baptized.

Furthermore, if the broader understanding of baptism is one of identification, then it makes sense that the purpose of water baptism is not to complete some salvation formula but is simply a way of identifying to the world in a physical way (being immersed in water) to a spiritual reality that has already taken place. The spiritual reality is that the person, based on their belief and trust in Jesus, now identifies with Jesus and Jesus’ death and is now a member of God’s family.

So what is baptism?

Baptism is a union with Jesus that takes place when we put our faith in Him and His death. At the very moment we do that, we become united with Jesus AND we become united with His death. Being united with His death means that His death now pays for my sins, which means I can experience forgiveness and I can escape the punishment I deserve for the sins I’ve committed.

This union with Christ means that I have a new identity – I’m a child of God!

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What was your experience with baptism growing up? Were you baptized? If so, what meaning was attributed to this religious ceremony by your religious tradition?

What do you think it means to be united with Christ?

If you think baptism is a religious ceremony that completes the salvation process, what do you think was the reason and purpose for Jesus being baptized? (See my post “Why Was Jesus Baptized?”)

If baptism was necessary for salvation, how do you explain Jesus’ words to the thief on the cross, who was never baptized, but was promised by Jesus that he would be with Jesus in paradise that very day?

 

Photo by Logan Gutierrez on Unsplash

Posted on

What is the Rapture?

1 Thessalonians 4

13And now, brothers and sisters, I want you to know what will happen to the Christians who have died so you will not be full of sorrow like people who have no hope. 14For since we believe that Jesus died and was raised to life again, we also believe that when Jesus comes, God will bring back with Jesus all the Christians who have died.

15I can tell you this directly from the Lord: We who are still living when the Lord returns will not rise to meet him ahead of those who are in their graves. 16For the Lord himself will come down from heaven with a commanding shout, with the call of the archangel, and with the trumpet call of God. First, all the Christians who have died will rise from their graves. 17Then, together with them, we who are still alive and remain on the earth will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air and remain with him forever. 18So comfort and encourage each other with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

You may have heard Christians talk about “the Rapture” and asked yourself, “what is that?”

The rapture is a biblical end times event that was popularized in the mid-to-late 20th century through books such as Hal Lindsey’s “Late Great Planet Earth” and the “Left Behind” book series from authors Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins.

While most evangelical Christians embrace the doctrine of Jesus’ second coming, that Jesus will appear at the end of time to judge the world, eradicate evil and reign over creation forever, not all Christians hold to the doctrine known as “the rapture”, which is considered an event that is separate from and preceding to the second coming of Christ.

For those who do hold to a “rapture” as a distinct event from the second coming, this passage in 1 Thessalonians is a primary passage in support of their view.

In this passage, Paul is seeking to console the Thessalonians who are grieved that many of their loved ones have passed. Paul is correcting a misunderstanding these young believers had concerning what happens to believers after they have passed.

Click here to see a A Comprehensive List of Blog Posts Based on Bible Passage Reference

The Thessalonians apparently had mistakenly believed that because their loved ones were in the grave, they would miss out on “the rapture”.

What exactly is the rapture?

“The rapture” is a doctrine that says Jesus will appear unexpectedly to take believers from this earth so that they might be with Him for eternity.

The word rapture comes from the Latin word “rapturo” which comes from verse 17 where Paul says that when Jesus returns, believers will be “caught up” with Christ in the clouds and will remain with Him forever. The Latin word for “caught up” is rapturo.

So the rapture is that moment when believers will be “caught up” with Jesus upon His return.

Paul tells these Thessalonian believers that those who have already died and are in the grave will be raised up first to meet Jesus and then those who are alive will be “caught up” with them.

So the order of events, according to this passage from Paul, is as follows:

    • Jesus will come back at some point. The exact timing of His return is not known so believers are exhorted to always be ready and to not be caught off guard
    • When Jesus returns, all those who have died will be resurrected and will meet Jesus in the clouds
    • Those believers who are alive on earth when Jesus returns will also meet Jesus in the clouds AFTER those who have already died are raised

As has already been mentioned, not all Christians agree that what Paul is describing in this passage is a separate, distinct event from the second coming of Christ. There are valid arguments for each view – that the rapture is a separate event that precedes the second coming of Jesus, and that the rapture is simply a different description of the second coming of Christ.

Regardless of the view one might take, we know for certain from this passage that Jesus WILL come back. When he does, those who have already died WILL be raised from the dead and WILL meet Jesus. Additionally, those who are alive when Jesus returns WILL also meet Jesus.

Paul says that this teaching is designed to give us hope, knowing that we, as believers, have a purpose and a destiny beyond this life. If there is no resurrection and no hope for life beyond our earthly physical existence, then, as Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15, “we are to be pitied more than all men.” (See my blog post “Will Christians Really Experience a Bodily Resurrection?“)

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What do you think happens to people after they die? What has been. your belief about the afterlife?

Have you heard of the rapture? What have you been taught about the events leading up to the “end times”?

Do you think it matters what a person believes about the end times? Why do you think it’s important that we, as Christians, understand what the Bible teaches about the end times?

If the rapture really is an event that is distinct from and preceding to the second coming of Jesus, how does that change how you think about the Christian life and live out the Christian life?

 

Photo by Mahmoud Yahyaoui: https://www.pexels.com/photo/dramatic-sunlight-through-fluffy-clouds-29286046/

Posted on

What Does it Mean to Carry the Burdens of Others but Not Their Loads?

Galatians 6

1Brothers, if someone is caught in a sin, you who are spiritual should restore him gently. But watch yourself, or you also may be tempted. 2Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. 3If anyone thinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceives himself. 4Each one should test his own actions. Then he can take pride in himself, without comparing himself to somebody else, 5for each one should carry his own load. 6Anyone who receives instruction in the word must share all good things with his instructor.(Galatians 6:1-6, NIV)

The Daily DAVEotional

In Galatians 6, Paul begins wrapping up his letter to these new believers who had been deceived into following a distorted gospel that included the addition of Jewish legal requirements to belief in Jesus as the Messiah.

In the previous section, Paul contrasted the “deeds of the flesh” against the “fruit of the Spirit.”

Following one’s fleshly desires leads to wicked, sinful living, while following the Spirit leads to godly character and righteous living depicted by the “fruit of the Spirit”.

But what does it look like to demonstrate “fruit of the Spirit” in the context of community?

In this first section of chapter 6, which is merely an extension of the reasoning of chapter 5, Paul gives three different examples of Spirit-led living within the context of community.

The first example is in how we treat others who sin. Paul says that those who are “spiritual”, that is, those who are Spirit-led, should seek to restore the other person with gentleness.

What Paul is saying is that the Spirit-led person understands that they themselves have sinned and are prone to sin. So we come to those who are trapped by their sin with gentleness and understanding.

This does not mean we condone, excuse or overlook sinful behavior. What it means is that we approach those who have sinned with an attitude of love and understanding instead of judgment. The goal is to restore the person, not punish them.

Secondly, Paul says that Spirit-led living means that we “carry each other’s burdens”, fulfilling the law of Christ. What does it mean to “fulfill the law of Christ”? It means that we demonstrate the love of Christ to others. Thus, Paul is saying that we demonstrate love to others when we carry their burdens.

But what does that mean?

Our understanding of this command is complicated by the seemingly contradictory command of verse 5, in which Paul states that “each one should carry his own load.”

So which one is it? Are we to carry each other’s burdens or not? It seems as if we’re being told in one verse that we’re supposed to help one another while in a following verse, we’re told each person is supposed to help themselves.

Is this where the popular adage “God helps those who help themselves” comes from?

Hardly.

So then, what does it mean? What is Paul saying?

To understand what Paul is saying in this passage, we need to understand the difference between the two different words used: burden and load.

Henry Cloud, in his book “Boundaries” explains that “the Greek word for burden means “excess burdens,” or burdens that are so heavy that they weigh us down. These burdens are like boulders. They can crush us.”

By contrast, ‘the Greek word for load means “cargo,” or “the burden of daily toil.” ‘ Henry Cloud gives the example of a knapsack or backpack that is normal for people to carry around.

The idea here is that a burden is not a normal situation. It’s when life brings an extreme trial or unusual struggle that is difficult to manage on your own.

An example might be the death of a loved one that dramatically alters the family dynamic or the unexpected loss of a job that plunges a person into financial turmoil. These are the kinds of life-impacting events that require more than normal love and support from others, whether they be close friends or extended family.

On the other hand, we all have normal, routine responsibilities that we must learn to manage.

Henry Cloud says that “problems arise when people act as if their “boulders” are daily loads and refuse help, or as if their “daily loads” are boulders they shouldn’t have to carry. The results of these two instances are either perpetual pain or irresponsibility.”

Dr. Cloud highlights two extremes that are becoming more common today. One issue is when people don’t take personal responsibility for normal, routine issues in their lives, but expect others to do for them what they should be able to do for themselves. We call those who participate in this behavior enablers.

We all have heard extreme examples of this: the 30 year old young man who is still living at home and spends most of his time holed up in his room playing video games. He has no meaningful job and no pathway to get a job that would allow him to be self-supporting. Meanwhile, mom still cooks all his meals and does his laundry while dad buys gas for his car so he can get around and hang out with his friends. The parents think they are “loving” him by not saying anything to him that would be mean or make him upset. They are treating him like he’s still in high school instead of treating him like a grown adult.

Paul says that each person should carry his own load, which means we should not treat our adult kids like they are still dependent on us and incapable of taking care of themselves. This is not actually loving.

The other extreme to this is to treat those who have experienced genuine trauma and upheaval in their lives as if they just need to suck it up and deal with it. This also is not loving.

Paul says that the loving approach to those who have heavy burdens thrust upon them is to support them by helping them to carry those burdens, while the loving approach to those who are not experiencing extreme trials is to not enable them. In other words, it’s loving to expect people to grow up and be responsible adults.

So a second way we demonstrate Spirit-led living in the context of community is by supporting others who are experiencing burdens in life that extend beyond the normal expected responsibilities that we all must manage.

A third way of expressing Spirit-led living is by supporting those who are impacting and influencing us spiritually. In verse 6, Paul says that those who are being instructed spiritually by others should share with those who are instructing them. In short, Paul is advocating for the support of those who are spiritual leaders by those whom they are leading.

Paul’s message is that we fulfill the law of Christ by demonstrating love to others. We love others when we gently help restore them to genuine fellowship with Christ, when we support those who are experiencing genuine trials and trauma in their lives and when we financially support those who are investing in our own spiritual growth and well-being.

Paul gives two warnings in this passage that can trip people up: when helping others with their sin issues be careful not to fall into that sin with them AND be careful not to enable those who may take advantage of your good nature by seeking your help for things they should be responsible for themselves.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What are some examples of burdens that some people might face that would require others to come alongside them to help carry those burdens?

What do you think are examples of responsibilities that would fall into the category of “load” for the typical person? In other words, what are some examples of responsibilities that are pretty much typical for most normal people?

When have you been involved in helping to carry the burden of another?

What are some of the dangers of not expecting another person to “carry their own load?” 

What do you think are some reasons why some people carry the load of others as if those loads are actually burdens?

What do you think are some ways you can determine if a person’s struggle is really a burden or whether it’s a load?

 

Photo by Erwan Grey: https://www.pexels.com/photo/man-with-a-big-bag-on-a-street-in-black-and-white-20850989/

Posted on

Why Did Paul Confront Peter in Galatians 2?

Galatians 2

11But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12For prior to the coming of certain men from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to withdraw and hold himself aloof, fearing the party of the circumcision.

13The rest of the Jews joined him in hypocrisy, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. 14But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in the presence of all, “If you, being a Jew, live like the Gentiles and not like the Jews, how is it that you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews?

15“We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; 16nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

17“But if, while seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves have also been found sinners, is Christ then a minister of sin? May it never be! 18“For if I rebuild what I have once destroyed, I prove myself to be a transgressor. 19“For through the Law I died to the Law, so that I might live to God.

20“I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. 21“I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.” (Galatians 2:11-21, NLT)

NOTE: Cephas is another name for Peter

The Daily DAVEotional

In the second half of Galatians 2, Paul mentions an odd encounter that he once had with Peter. He says that he (Paul) had to confront Peter (also known as Cephas) publicly because he was acting like a hypocrite.

The whole ordeal sounds pretty uncomfortable and embarrassing. What’s actually happening here?

To more clearly understand Paul’s encounter with Peter in this passage, we need to know a little bit about the context of this letter and why Paul is writing it in the first place.

Paul and Barnabas had established a number of churches in the Southern province of Galatia as an outcome of their first missionary journey (see Acts 13-14).

However, even though their mission of planting a number of new churches was wildly successful, it wasn’t all smooth sailing, as Paul and Barnabas encountered quite a bit of opposition along the way, primarily from Jewish unbelievers.

Not long after establishing these new churches, false teachers had infiltrated and were leading the Galatians astray. Paul tells these young believers that what they were following was a false gospel, a distortion of the truth.

At issue was the very nature of how a person is saved. I wrote about this issue in another blog post “A Pivotal Council in the Early Church” which I encourage you to read for context.

The summary is that there were a number of Jewish Pharisees who had become believers in Jesus. They held the view that in order for Gentiles to be saved, they not only needed to believe in Jesus as the Messiah, but they also had to convert to Judaism and adhere to all of its religious and cultural demands.

A council was convened to discuss this issue. The leaders of the church, including Peter, unanimously agreed that Gentiles do NOT need to become Jewish culturally in order to be saved. They determined that ALL men, regardless of cultural background, are saved by simply putting their faith in Jesus.

So what’s happening here in Galatians 2? Why does Paul confront Peter?

Apparently Peter showed up at the church in Antioch, which was known for having a mix of Jewish and Gentile believers. While there, Peter enjoyed hanging out with and eating with these new Gentile brothers and sisters. After all, he came to understand In Acts 10 that Gentiles are accepted by God in the same manner that Jews are – by faith.

However, the text says that Peter began to pull back from associating with these Gentile believers when a certain group came to visit the church in Antioch. It says that there was a group of Jewish believers who were friends with James. When these guys showed up, Peter begins acting like he doesn’t know the Gentiles with whom he had been freely associating.

This James Gang (not to be confused with the classic rock band of the same name) had a certain view and understanding that was not compatible with the gospel. This was a group that had favored the view that was rejected at the Council of Jerusalem, namely, that Gentiles needed to adhere to Jewish religious laws and cultures too.

There was an air of superiority with this group. They looked down on Gentiles, mainly because it had been drilled into them their whole lives that Gentiles were unclean and “less than” Jews. They were sinners, without the Law of God.

But Peter had been given a direct revelation from God in Acts 10 that this view was not godly. God does not look down on Gentiles and for Jews to do so was not honoring to God. One might even say it was racist.

Peter responded to that revelation in Acts 10 and the result was that Cornelius, the Roman soldier, came to faith and it was at this point that Gentiles are first inaugurated into the body of Christ.

Now here in Galatians 2, Paul tells his audience that Peter enjoyed fellowshipping with his Gentile brothers and sisters and no doubt enjoyed eating non-kosher foods as well.

But when this “party of the circumcision” arrived, Peter was afraid of what they might think. So he pulled back and disassociated himself from the Gentiles.

This exact scenario is beautifully illustrated in the 2017 movie Wonder, in which a disfigured boy named Auggie is hopelessly tortured by a group of schoolyard bullies.

Auggie is befriended by Noah who learns to overlook Auggie’s physical appearance in favor of his kind nature. 

However, there is a critical scene in the movie where Noah purposefully betrays Auggie’s friendship in order to gain favor with this group of bullies. This Halloween scene in the movie mirrors the situation with Peter described by Paul. I recommend watching this movie, taking note of your emotional response to this scene. Then read this passage again. Perhaps you will see the destructive effects of hypocrisy and partiality in a new light.

Paul calls Peter a hypocrite. The word hypocrite is actually an acting term (Greek hypokrites). In those times, all the parts in a theater production were played by just a few actors, mostly men. The actors would put different masks on to represent the part they were playing. The word hypocrite refers to the mask that the actor wore.

So, to be a hypocrite is really to wear a mask. It’s when we seek to project an image to others that doesn’t represent who we really are or what we really believe.

That’s what Paul accused Peter of doing. Peter believed that Gentiles were saved just as Jews are and he enjoyed connecting with this group of non-Jews, that is, until the James gang showed up. Then Peter, fearing what these Jewish zealots might think, sought to give the impression that he saw these Gentiles as unclean, as the old Jewish laws promoted.

If Peter, one of the foremost leaders of the early church, could fall into hypocrisy, then anyone can.

All of us are hypocrites to some degree. We’re often negatively influenced by others and we can tend to order our lives around creating a favorable impression of ourselves to those around us. This is what John Ortberg, in his book “The Life You’ve Always Wanted” calls impression management.

Jesus called the Pharisees hypocrites because they created an outward impression of religious perfectionism that didn’t match their internal brokenness and depravity.

This is why we need the gospel. We are hopelessly broken and corrupt inwardly, and yet we seek to project an image of success and “having it all together” to those around us.

With the gospel, we not only experience forgiveness for our depravity, but we have the hope of transformation so that over time, our outward actions begin to more accurately reflect the new heart that we have been given.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

What are some examples of hypocrisy that you are aware of? People you’ve known personally or in the media?

When have you acted in a hypocritical manner?

Sometimes hypocrisy can spread due to peer pressure (as it did in this passage). When have you seen someone or a group of people act against their own beliefs and values as a result of peer pressure?

What are some ways you tend to manage your image to those around you? In what ways have you compromised your values or beliefs in order to garner favor with an individual or group?

What do you think are practical steps you can take to avoid hypocrisy? 

How do you think the gospel message provides hope for becoming a person of integrity and not a person who is hypocritical?

 

Photo by Finan Akbar on Unsplash

Posted on

Will Christians Really Experience a Bodily Resurrection?

1 Corinthians 15

12But tell me this—since we preach that Christ rose from the dead, why are some of you saying there will be no resurrection of the dead? 13For if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised either. 14And if Christ was not raised, then all our preaching is useless, and your trust in God is useless. 15And we apostles would all be lying about God, for we have said that God raised Christ from the grave, but that can’t be true if there is no resurrection of the dead. 16If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ has not been raised. 17And if Christ has not been raised, then your faith is useless, and you are still under condemnation for your sins. 18In that case, all who have died believing in Christ have perished! 19And if we have hope in Christ only for this life, we are the most miserable people in the world.

20But the fact is that Christ has been raised from the dead. He has become the first of a great harvest of those who will be raised to life again. (1 Corinthians 15:12-20, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

The resurrection of Jesus is one of the cornerstone doctrines that sets Christianity apart from all other religions.

The resurrection is vitally important because without the resurrection, there is no Christianity. What we think of as Christianity just becomes another religion where its followers seek to adhere to the advice and admonitions of a self-proclaimed guru.

Quite simply, the resurrection proves that Jesus is God, which is significant because only God could provide complete atonement for the sins of mankind. if you want to understand the theological ramifications of the resurrection, I explain more of the logical reasoning behind this idea in my post “He is Risen…Why Does it Matter?”

In this section of his letter to the Corinthians, Paul is responding to an apparent misunderstanding about the resurrection that was circulating within the church.

It seems that many in the church could not wrap their mind around the idea that they would experience a bodily resurrection. This aligns with prevalent Greek understanding at that time, in which the body was seen as a prison or a shell for the soul. Greek philosophy had a concept of the immortality of the soul but not so much for the body.

In this passage, Paul addresses the faulty thinking that denied a future bodily resurrection. His argument is as follows:

    • If there is no such thing as a resurrection, then obviously, Christ was not resurrected (verse 13)
    • If Christ hasn’t been raised (resurrected) then our preaching is in vain (wasted) and as a result, your faith is in vain because it is predicated on the message we preached (verse 14)
    • In addition, we are then false witnesses because we preached the resurrection of Jesus whom God did not raise (verse 15)
    • Hence, If Christ hasn’t been raised, your faith is worthless and you are still in your sins; they have not been paid for (verse 17)
    • Furthermore, those who have died then have perished (verse 18)
    • Therefore, if the hope of Christ is for this life only, we should be pitied (verse 19)

Paul then ends the argument in verse 20, saying:

But the fact is that Christ has been raised from the dead. He has become the first of a great harvest of those who will be raised to life again. [emphasis added]

In short, without a resurrection, there can be no salvation and as a result, this life is all there is. That makes life ultimately meaningless and Christianity is just a nihilistic ideology with lipstick.

The resurrection is not only the cornerstone of the Christian faith, proving that Jesus is God and therefore His death completely atones for the sins of mankind, but the resurrection also signifies that those who believe in Christ will ALSO experience a bodily resurrection, just as Jesus did.

So if you like your body, the good news is that you will have an even better model in eternity. And if you DON’T like your body for whatever reason, you can rest assured that your resurrected body will be an upgrade, free from defects, flaws and imperfections.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

Reflection

What has been your concept of life after death? In other words, what do you imagine heaven to be like for you and others who are there?

How does the concept of having a resurrected body align or contradict your thinking about heaven and eternal life?

How confident are you in the resurrection of Jesus? What are some reasons that cause you to doubt whether it is actually true?

If Jesus was not resurrected, how do you explain the crucifixion? What was it’s purpose? What did it accomplish?

 

Photo by Kelly Sikkema on Unsplash

Posted on

What is Sexual Immorality?

1 Corinthians 7

1Now about the questions you asked in your letter. Yes, it is good to live a celibate life. 2But because there is so much sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman should have her own husband.

3The husband should not deprive his wife of sexual intimacy, which is her right as a married woman, nor should the wife deprive her husband. 4The wife gives authority over her body to her husband, and the husband also gives authority over his body to his wife. 5So do not deprive each other of sexual relations. The only exception to this rule would be the agreement of both husband and wife to refrain from sexual intimacy for a limited time, so they can give themselves more completely to prayer. Afterward they should come together again so that Satan won’t be able to tempt them because of their lack of self-control. 6This is only my suggestion. It’s not meant to be an absolute rule. 7I wish everyone could get along without marrying, just as I do. But we are not all the same. God gives some the gift of marriage, and to others he gives the gift of singleness. 8Now I say to those who aren’t married and to widows—it’s better to stay unmarried, just as I am. 9But if they can’t control themselves, they should go ahead and marry. It’s better to marry than to burn with lust. (1 Corinthians 7:1-8, NLT)

The Daily DAVEotional

We live in a highly sexualized culture.  After all, “sex sells” as they say.

Our culture’s current views on sex can be traced back to the sexual revolution of the 1960’s. Until then, it was commonly understood and accepted within the culture that sex was reserved for marriage. Any portrayal outside of that paradigm was generally frowned upon.

I remember watching reruns of “I Love Lucy” as a kid and when they showed Ricky and Lucy’s bedroom, there were two twin beds.

Opening scene of “I Love Lucy” from the episode “Lucy is Envious” (Season 3, Episode 23) showing Lucy and Ricky’s bedroom in which Lucy and Ricky sleep in separate beds.

Now everyone knew that married couples sleep together but there was a stigma associated with sex. It wasn’t talked about and it certainly wasn’t portrayed on screen.

But things started to change in the 1960’s with the sexual revolution, which sought to break down the social mores that existed at the time, promoting sexual activity for anyone who might want to partake, even if you weren’t married.

Sex was just an activity, the thinking went. It was just pleasure. Nothing more, nothing less. Why should two people who wanted to engage in something pleasurable be denied this activity? Why should society shame people who weren’t married but happened to be engaging in intercourse?

And so for the last 50+ years, our culture has engaged in one of the most intense, long-lasting and successful media campaigns to change the culture’s perception of sex.

I say it’s been successful because there is no doubt that our culture’s views and attitudes toward sex have drastically changed over the last 50-60 years. What started with posters and buttons telling us to “Make Love, not War” advanced to TV shows and movies that continued to push the envelope in terms of what was shown to viewers.

Throughout the culture at large, the stigma that existed with people engaging in sex outside of marriage has largely been erased. In fact, the topic of sex, which was once considered taboo and off limits in public is actively promoted by our education system as well as the media in TV shows and movies.

Christians who hold to the authority of the Bible are perhaps the last holdout for the antiquated view that sex is reserved for marriage between a man and woman.

But in recent years, even the Bible has come under attack for its views on sex. Many people who identify as Christians no longer believe that the Bible restricts sexual activity to married couples.

Many Christians believe that it’s ok to have sex before marriage and still others believe that the Bible affirms sexual activity among same-sex couples.

The problem with some of these views is this phrase “sexual immorality”. The Bible clearly condemns sexual immorality in both the Old and New Testaments. There is nowhere in the Bible where sexual immorality is not condemned as sinful.

The question then is: what is sexual immorality? While there may be wider agreement that sexual immorality is wrong (I mean, it’s hard to deny since the word “immoral” is embedded in the phrase), there is less agreement on what activities fall under that larger umbrella term.

This post is not long enough to do justice to this topic, but this passage does give some insight into the issue.

It appears that one of the issues this church was dealing with had to do with prohibited sexual practices. Like our culture, the Corinthian culture was highly sexualized and sexual temptation abounded. Some were suggesting that the remedy for avoiding sexual temptation was a commitment to celibacy, even within the confines of marriage.

Being single himself, Paul affirmed that being celibate has certain advantages. However, his solution for combating sexual temptation was NOT abstinence. Instead, Paul’s solution for those who have strong sexual urges and are struggling to control them is to satisfy those sexual desires within a marriage relationship.

Whatever your definition of sexual immorality is, Paul’s solution to addressing the sexual temptation is to get married and to get busy!

What I find interesting is that Paul says that each MAN should have his own wife and each WOMAN should have her own husband.

In just these few verses, Paul establishes that sex within the confines of marriage between a husband and wife is NOT sexual immorality, but is the antidote to sexual immorality. The strong implication is that any sexual activity that is not between a married man and woman IS sexual immorality.

There are some who undoubtedly will disagree with this assertion, stating that Paul only mentions the marriage relationship and doesn’t mention other potentially acceptable sexual relationships because of cultural reasons.

That is exactly the point though. The Bible clearly condemns sexual immorality but in our culture, morality is no longer tethered to any objective standard.

Hence, the list of activities that are considered sexually immoral and therefore prohibited are continually being condensed by the culture. This means that any appeal to the Bible regarding sexual ethics has to be reframed or explained in such a way to allow for those practices that have traditionally been considered sexually immoral.

This passage certainly isn’t the last word on biblical sexual ethics. It may not even be a main passage used for or against one’s preferred sexual views.

But it’s clear that sexual temptation, which was very strong in this culture and was a major issue within the Corinthian church, prompted Paul to make a statement regarding how to deal with that temptation. The ONE thing he affirms as being appropriate and NOT sexually immoral, is for husbands and wives to be engaged and active sexually.

This is the traditional, biblical view of sexual ethics – that only sex within the context of a marriage union between one man and one woman is ordained by God, and it is clearly affirmed by Paul in this passage.

 

Did you enjoy this post? I’d love to hear your thoughts! Feel free to like, leave a comment below, and share it with your friends or on social media if you found it helpful or interesting. Your support keeps the conversation going!

 

Reflection

How would you define sexual immorality? What do you think is included in that category?

How did you arrive at your answer to the previous question? What role does the Bible play in determining your morality?

Do you think that there are some sexual sins that the Bible prohibited but that are no morally ok? If so, what is the reasoning for your position?

In what ways do you see the culture influencing people’s views on sex and morality in general?

 

Photo by Dima Solomin on Unsplash

Posted on

How to Study an Epistle

Many people would love to know the Bible better but don’t know where to begin or how to go about it.

The problem with the Bible is that it’s not a book that you can read like a John Grisham or Steven King novel.

The Bible is actually a collection of works written over a long period of time by many different authors in different languages and in different settings.

There are many types of literary genres represented in the Bible. Some of the books are historical narrative while other books are poetry, wisdom literature or books of prophecy.

In the New Testament, the gospels are historical narrative, detailing the life of Jesus from the different perspectives of the 4 different authors, but most of the New Testament comes to us in the form of epistles, or letters that were written to individuals and churches.

How does one study an epistle? Is it different than how one might approach the gospels?

The short answer is that yes, the way one approaches an epistle is different than how one might approach the gospels or some other book that is largely historical narrative.

With historical narrative, like the gospels or the book of Acts, the author is telling you a story, giving you relevant details along the way. The author includes important events and people to make the point he wants to make.

An epistle, on the other hand, is really one side of a two-way conversation.

To illustrate what I mean, consider the following situation. The other day, my wife received a phone call. After answering “hello”, she moved to the other room, but I could still hear everything she was saying.

I wasn’t sure who had called or why, but after about 10-15 minutes of conversation, it was more clear to me who my wife was talking to and what the topic was. I was only hearing one side of the conversation but from that one side, I was able to determine what was being discussed.

Reading and studying a New Testament epistle is much the same. Most of these New Testament letters were written to individuals or churches in response to questions that had been asked or some problem that was being addressed.

Hence, studying an epistle requires some literary detective skills.

Now being a Bible study sleuth takes some practice, but here are a few things that you may find helpful as you get started:

    1. Read the whole letter in one sitting. This will give you a better big picture perspective. This will be easier with shorter letters like 2 Timothy, Colossians or Philippians but will require more time and patience with longer letters like Romans, 1 Corinthians or Hebrews.
    2. Note who the author is and who the audience is.
    3. What is the context for the letter? What is the tone of the letter? What do you know about the audience or the recipient that might be helpful to understanding the contents of the letter?
    4. What are the themes that surface in the letter? What is the main argument being made?

When studying an epistle, you always want to try to determine what is the issue or problem being addressed. What is the reason the author is writing the letter?

Epistles often have a logical argument or a persuasive message. By noticing repeated words and phrases and outlining the message of the letter, you can begin to get a better picture, so to speak, of the author’s intent for writing.

When studying an epistle, it’s helpful to break it down into smaller sections for a deeper dive.

Think of it this way – a lawyer might have 3 or 4 bullet points to support an argument or defend a position. Sometimes, the New Testament writers will have a multi-pronged argument to make their case or defend a thesis. Part of the job of Bible study is determining the logical argument and the bullet points that support the argument.

For some, this might seem like too much work. “I’ll just let the pastor tell me what it says” or “I’ll just read a commentary that explains it”.

That is certainly faster and doesn’t require as much work or effort. But if you want to understand the Bible for yourself, learning some good Bible study skills is essential.

Go ahead and give it a try. Start with a shorter book like Colossians, Philippians, Galatians or Ephesians. These letters are filled with great doctrinal truths and practical instruction for living as Christians but aren’t so long that they’re too difficult to manage. It’s the equivalent of starting out running a mile or two before attempting to run a half-marathon.

Reflection

What has been your experience with studying the Bible? 

How would you rate your desire to study the Bible? How would you rate your experience or skill in being able to study the Bible?

What keeps you from studying the Bible more consistently (time, motivation, fear, etc.)? What would help you become more active in studying the Bible consistently?

What epistles have you studied in depth? What epistles are on your “bucket” list of books you’d like to study?

 

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash