Category Archives: Scripture

Topics related to the Bible and the Christian life

Spiritual Authority

Posted on by
Reply

Between 1984 and 2010, if you picked up an NIV Bible and turned to 1 Thessalonians 5:12, here is what you would have read:

Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you. (NIV1984)

In 1998, the New International Reader’s Version was published, which simplifies things for those who read on a more basic level.

Brothers and sisters, we ask you to have respect for the godly leaders who work hard among you. They have authority over you. They correct you. (NIrV)

In 2005, after attempts to revise the NIV generated controversy, Today’s New International Version was published as a separate version alongside the NIV.

Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. (TNIV)

Now in 2011, the NIV has been revised, replacing both the 1984 version and the TNIV with a single version that incorporates many of the changes that were made in the TNIV.

Now we ask you, brothers and sisters, to acknowledge those who work hard among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. (NIV)

Has there been a weakening of the “authority” language?  I’m not a New Testament scholar, so I cannot attest to which translation is best.  However, compare the NIV with these other translations, which are touted as being very accurate:

But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction (NASB)

We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you (ESV)

Now, you might argue that having “care for” someone is essentially the same as having “charge over” someone, and that the NIV still indicates spiritual authority.  But in an age of freedom and independence, are readers of the NIV going to read this verse as an indication that we have people over us, leaders whose word carries more weight than ours?

I’m a Protestant.  I believe in sola scriptura and the priesthood of all believers.  I have no desire to elevate pastors or elders to an undue level of authority.  I am still responsible before God for obeying His Word, regardless of what my pastor might say about this thing or that.  However, I’m worried that there is a high degree of individualism in the church that prevents people from recognizing spiritual authority. Most people have the idea that “we’re all equal,” and “it’s just between me and God.”  They might listen to their pastor because he studies a lot and is more knowledgeable than they, but they don’t really see him as being “over” them.  And yet, Scripture says that there are those who are “over [us] in the Lord.” (TNIV and NIV 2011 notwithstanding.)

What, then, does proper spiritual authority look like?  What are the bounds of pastoral authority?  How is it different on an interpersonal level compared to a communal (local church) level?

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Thessalonians%205:12&version=ESV

Calvinism in John 3

Posted on by
Reply

Recently, I was reading a passage from the third chapter of John, home of the world’s most familiar verse, and was struck by several verses that reflect God’s sovereignty in the choice of his elect.

Verse 19 says, “This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.”

The contrasting verse is verse 21, which says, “But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God.”

It seems to me that this is not a case of men seeing the light of Christ and then evaluating how they should respond.  It’s not like they were presented a choice and could go either way.  On the contrary, their response was predetermined by who they were.

Those who love the darkness do so because they are evil doers.  Those who accept Christ do not become lovers of truth as a result of coming into the light; rather, they come into the light because God has awakened them to the truth.

Going back up to verse 8 (and preceding), Jesus compares the Spirit (Gr., pneuma) with wind (also pneuma).  He says that a re-born spirit is the work of the Spirit, and the Spirit is like the wind in that it “blows wherever it pleases.”  The main point is that spiritual rebirth is a very real thing despite the mechanism being unseen.  However, the passage also implies that the Spirit is not only the “mechanism” that does the regeneration, but also the reason why regeneration takes place.

John 3:16 (and 15) is frequently read as if belief is the criteria for being born again, which is in turn the criteria for eternal life.  However, that is not what Jesus said.  He simply said that those who believe will have eternal life.  I contend that it makes more sense in the context of the chapter to think that those who have been born again are those who will believe.  In other words, spiritual rebirth is the criteria for belief, not the other way around.

The Wrath of God

Posted on by
Reply

The other day I had a fictional conversation in my head.  In this conversation, I recommended a work by Jonathan Edwards.

Although I don’t really know, I’m guessing that responses to Jonathan Edwards frequently fall into one of several different categories:

1.  Jonathan Edwards is my homeboy!  He was a great thinker and theologian; there is much that can be learned from him.

2.  I’ve heard of him, but that’s about it.

3.  Yeah, I’m not a big fan of those “hellfire and damnation,” “fire and brimstone” types.  We serve a God of love!

These are exaggerated generalizations, and I’m sure there are other categories, but I suspect these three are fairly common reactions.

In my imagined scenario, the person to whom I was speaking fell into the 3rd category.

At that point, I don’t bother trying to convince them that Edwards may have something valuable to offer.  That maybe they have the wrong impression of him; that maybe they should actually read Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, instead of just dismiss it.  Instead, I suggest that maybe they should do a study on God’s wrath.

John 3:16 is a wonderful verse.  It’s great news that God offers eternal life to those who believe in Jesus.  But it’s a mistake to focus solely on the positive.  It’s simply not true that the only barrier to eternal life is man’s unwillingness to accept it.  The real barrier, an insurmountable barrier (unless God removes it), is God’s wrath.

John 3:16 says that if we believe in Jesus we will not perish.  We had better ask the question, “why would we perish otherwise?”  We need to read the whole chapter.  John 3:36 tells us that if a person doesn’t believe (and obey) Jesus, then God’s wrath remains (or abides) on him.

I think it’s also worth noting that John isn’t just saying, “one day (in the future) you’ll face God’s wrath” if you don’t trust in Jesus.  It’s true that the day of Judgment, when God pours out His full wrath, is still coming.  But John 3:36 says that God’s wrath “remains.”  It’s already there.  John 3:18 says that the one who doesn’t believe is already under condemnation.

Another instructive passage is in Romans.  Romans 5:8 is quite popular, and rightly so.  But many seem to have lost sight of Romans 5:9.  When we are saved by Christ, what are we saved from?  From ourselves?  Are we rescued from Satan’s grip?  Certainly salvation includes release from bondage to many things, but primarily, we are saved from the wrath of God.

When Jesus died for us, he drank the cup of God’s wrath for us (Matt. 26:42; Isa. 53:4-5,10; Gal. 3:13).  Those who do not trust in Jesus will have to drink the cup of God’s wrath on their own (Rev. 14:10).

There are some within Christianity who minimize or deny the importance of Christ’s substitutionary atonement.  This is a problem, not due to differing interpretations of theological minutia, but a problem of not understanding and appreciating God’s wrath.

There but for the grace of God, go I

Posted on by
1

Continuing my thoughts on the topic of grace, particularly the idea that God’s grace provides strength and power, not just favored status, I’d like to look at the common phrase, “There but for the grace of God, go I.”

Several websites confirm an understanding of this phrase that is more-or-less the way I have normally understood it.

For example, The Phrase Finder defines the meaning as “I too, like someone seen to have suffered misfortune, might have suffered a similar fate, but for God’s mercy.”

Adrian Room, writing in Brewer’s Dictionary of Phrase & Fable, says that the phrase (normally uttered upon observing the disaster or disgrace that has befallen someone as a result of their actions or misdoings) “implies that most of us have committed the same follies, sins etc., but have been fortunate enough to escape the consequences.”

The Free Dictionary has an entry explaining the phrase to mean that, “I would likely have experienced or done the same bad thing if God had not been watching over me.”

Finally, here are the definitions provided by Wiktionary:

  1. A recognition that others’ misfortune could be one’s own, if it weren’t for the blessing/kindness/luck bestowed by fate or the Divine.
  2. Man’s fate is in God’s hands.
  3. More generally, our fate is not entirely in our own hands.

Each of these definitions is true. It’s not my intention to dispute these definitions, but to provide an alternative mindset for thinking about this phrase. The standard thought behind this phrase is that we are passive. I am attempting to change my thinking about the grace of God to include an active element.

“There but for the grace of God, go I,” not because I passively managed to avoid (by luck or by providence) what befell someone else, but because God granted me grace to live a different life.

I still recognize that, in my own power, I could not keep myself from the same behavior and the same results, no matter how hard I try or how much I want to. However, through God’s grace, I don’t just experience different circumstances. My life is actually different. I am a different person. “Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift,” his exceeding grace, which is in us (2 Cor. 9:14-15, ASV). Quoting Matthew Henry again, this grace “enables and inclines” our hearts to do what we could not (if we wanted) and would not (if we were able) do on our own.

Grace

Posted on by
Reply

In one of my more recent posts, I wrote about the difficulty of repentance, and the empowering work of grace.

It is only through God’s grace that we can repent. Grace isn’t the overlooking of faults. Grace isn’t expressing appreciation of someone undeserving. Grace is the power to do what we could not do in and of ourselves. (Hard times come again more and more)

The common definition of grace as “unmerited favor” is perhaps a little misleading, at least the way we tend to understand favor. My tendency, at least, is to think of “favor” as simply to “look at someone” with a “favorable attitude,” or to ultimately reward someone despite the fact that they don’t deserve it. While this definition captures the “unmerited” nature of God’s grace, I don’t think it sufficiently captures the fact that grace doesn’t just mean an “award,” but it delivers an “ability.”

Matthew Henry states this dual aspect of grace better than I could have, in his commentary on Romans 7.

“We are under grace, which promises strength to do what it commands, and pardon upon repentance when we do amiss.”

I see a lot of focus on the forgiving nature of grace, but not much mention of the fact that grace is not just a status; it is the ability to accomplish what God intends for us.