1 Timothy
We come now to the first in a group of letters commonly referred to as the “Pastoral Letters”—so called b/c Paul addresses pastors, viz., Timothy and Titus.
Most mainstream scholars (about 85%) consider these letters not to have been written by Paul but by 1 of his followers, in which case, they date 1 Timothy to the early 2nd century; and therefore it would not have been written to the Timothy of Acts. In my Ephesians: 1 blog entry I summarized the criteria for determining authenticity. I want to revisit that now, but focus only on 1 factor: vocabulary. 1 of the arguments against Paul having written 1-2 Timothy and Titus is the difference in vocab. between these letters and letters like Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, etc. To summarize: 306 words in the Pastorals don’t appear in any of Paul’s other letters; also the Pastorals only produce synonyms where you would expect typical Pauline formulas; e.g., you read “God our Saviour” or “our God and Saviour Jesus” rather than the more typical “Christ our Saviour”; or you get “Epiphany” (from the Greek) for Christ’s 2nd Coming rather than Paul’s usual term, “Parousia” (Greek).
But, there is another side to this vocabulary argument. 1st, most of the other words in the Pastorals (64%) are actually found in pre-50 AD texts, meaning, the Pastorals read more like a text written pre-50 than a second-century text. 2nd, the Pauline letters total to about 2000 words—clearly, only part of Paul’s overall vocabulary. So, could the 306 “unique” words in the Pastorals be found in the remainder of Paul’s vocabulary? 3rd, written texts are always conditioned by the original audience/reader. At face value, the Pastorals were not written for believers at large but for church leaders—specifically, pastoral colleagues of Paul. Given this huge difference in readership you would expect more technical/advanced ideas. You could think of it like this: when 2 mechanics talk about your car’s mechanical problem to each other, they use very different language/terms (e.g., auto slang) than when they talk with you about it. As well, a letter to pastoral colleagues would probably draw from a specialized conceptual or language bank, and would also express different concerns than a general letter would (e.g., it would be more teaching/doctrine focused). OK, enuff about that!
If Paul wrote 1 Timothy then the social-historical occasion of his letter—like the following 2 letters—would be that Paul wants to help Timothy (and later Titus) to deal with the danger false teaching in the church, and to deal with the church’s organizational difficulties. Timothy was 1 of Paul’s traveling companions who accompanied him on his “mission runs” (recorded in Acts), and he was taking up the reigns of leadership in Ephesus. The letters would then date to the mid 60s.
The basic structure of 1 Timothy is: opening greeting (1:1-2), Paul’s instructions for Timothy (1:3-2:15), guidelines for leaders (3:1-16), more instructions for Timothy (4:1-16), more instructions for the ministry (5:1-6:2), and further instructions for Timothy (6:2-21). There’s a lot in 1 Timothy, but I’m simply going to highlight a few things.
Paul begins his letter to his protégé by warning him against false teachers (1:1-9a). He says that the teaching in question—what the Ephesian church was encountering—is based on endless speculations rather than apostolic truth (1 Tim 1:3-4), and the on the misuse of the Mosaic Law (1 Tim 1:6-8). The goal of teaching is to bring about in your students/congregation a pure heart and genuine faith in Christ (1:5); Paul himself is an example of this transformation from the “worst of sinners” to a faithful apostle (1:12-16).
In everything prayer remains of prime importance (1 Tim 2:1), so Paul encourages Tim to pray for everyone, but especially for those in civic authority so that their governance would ensure the continued spread of the gospel (1 Tim 2:2), since God desires that people from every nation, culture, and language would come to a knowledge of the truth (2:3-4). With respect to the role of married women in the church, Paul commands that they remain in submission to their husbands (2:9-15). Question: Does his edict target only married women or is it for all women?
Paul offers some guidelines for church leadership, beginning 1st with those who feel called to pastoral ministry. This type of burden is surely a good thing to have (1 Tim 3:1). Paul insists that such people must be upright in character (3:2-3), and be faithful stewards of their personal affairs (3:4-5), not a recent convert (3:6), and must already possess a good reputation with unbelievers (3:7). The prerequisites for deacons are quite similar: an upright character and faithful stewardship of one’s personal affairs (3:8-13). Question: Why is this important?
Paul then discusses with Timothy the End Times. Similar to what he said in 2 Thessalonians, many “Christians” people will fall away from the faith to follow the deceptive doctrines/teaching of demons (1 Tim 4:1-2). Therefore, he urges Tim to live a disciplined life: to avoid false teaching, to strive for personal godliness, to be an example for other people, to preach and teach the scriptures, to use his spiritual gifts, and thru it all, to persevere in his life and his teaching (4:6-16). Question: How does someone “persevere” in his/her teaching?
In terms of other instructions for the ministry, Paul describes for Tim (being a young pastor) how to relate appropriately to the different age groups within the church (1 Tim 5:1-2). He focuses on widows saying that he should honour and care for elderly widows and caution younger widows about living a sensual lifestyle (5:3-16). When it comes to dealing with “elders,” i.e., church leadership, he says that: the congregation must treat their leaders with “double honour” (1 Tim 5:17-18); accusations against them must be grounded in eye-witness accounts (5:19), and b/c of the respect due an elder, they should never be appointed too quickly (5:22).
In leaving Timothy with some parting instructions, Paul again warns him about false teachers—especially their inner motivations (6:3-5). He warns him about the allurement of wealth. Wealth is not to be pursued b/c it can be a dangerous snare to people (1 Tim 6:6-10); rather, people should pursue spiritual wealth, i.e., they should seek to be rich in good deeds (6:17-19). By fleeing ungodliness, and pursuing a life of righteousness, Timothy will “fight the good fight of faith,” & take hold of that for which God has taken hold of him: eternal life (1 Tim 6:12).
2 Thessalonians
2 Thessalonians, although shorter, is quite similar to 1 Thessalonians: Paul expresses his thankfulness for the church’s exemplary lifestyle and their reputation among the churches, he prays for the church, there is a relatively lengthy discussion of the End Times, he reminisces about being a model to them and not being a financial burden—just to cite a few of the similarities. This letter was probably written very soon after 1 Thessalonians, and thus, most of the social-historical background of that letter would apply to this one.
The basic outline of the letter is: introduction (1:1-12), End Times warning (2:1-12), prayers (3:1-5), ethical exhortations (3:6-17), and closing (3:17-18). Let’s look at the text.
Like the first letter, Paul gushes with gratitude for the Thessalonians, particularly for their growing faith, their growing love for one another, and their endurance through their trials (2 Thess 1:3-4). He encourages the believers, saying that their perseverance through afflictions/suffering confirms the genuineness of their faith, as well as stores up heavenly rewards for them when Christ returns (2 Thess 1:5-10). The idea that perseverance through trials confirms true faith, while exposing fake faith—i.e., faith that fails to endure—runs throughout the entire NT, beginning with Jesus’ parables (e.g., Matt 13:18-23), and extending through the life and letters of Paul (e.g., Acts 9:15-16; Phil 1:29-30; cf. 1 Pet 1:6-7). Question: Why does God choose suffering as a means of confirming faith? In light of the return of Jesus to judge the world, Paul prays that the church would (continue to) live a life worthy of their calling in Christ so that Christ might be honoured in/through them (2 Thess 1:11-12).
This talk of the End carries over into the 2nd chapter, where Paul focuses on the “man of lawlessness.” It’s clear that some believers were still under the impression that they had missed the 2nd Coming (2 Thess 2:1-2; cf. 1 Thess 5:1-2). Paul dispels that notion saying that certain, impossible-to-be-missed signs will precede Christ’s 2nd Coming: e.g., many “Christians” will turn away from the faith (2:2a), and, the man of lawlessness will appear and try to usurp God’s place and worship (2:2b-4). Certainly, the man of lawlessness is the Anti-Christ (= AC, with my apologies to people who call themselves “AC” for short), who appears most prominently in the book of Revelation. Similar to his depiction in Revelation, Satan works through and alongside of the AC, bringing about miraculous signs and mass deception (2:8-13). Paul states that, at least for the present time, the powers of darkness associated with the AC have been kept in check by the “restrainer” (2 Thess 2:7). Who or what the restrainer is continues to be debated: the Holy Spirit, the church, James the Just, Roman Imperial power. I, for one, don’t really know.
B/c of the activity of Satan and the AC, the masses will reject the truth and embrace their lies and wickedness; consequently, God will harden the masses in their unbelief, by sending them a spirit of deception so they can believe whatever they like to their hearts’ content (2:10-12). Question: Why? What do you think is the point of God doing this? By way of stark contrast, Paul offers a picture of the Trinitarian salvation which believers embrace: they have been “loved by the Lord,” (God the Son) b/c God (the Father) has chosen them in eternity passed, and set them apart by the Holy Spirit to receive the gospel and gain Christ (2 Thess 2:13-14).
Having offered a 2nd prayer for the Thessalonians (for their encouragement; 2:16-17), Paul now asks them for prayer: that the gospel would spread quickly through he and his partners (Silvanus/Silas and Timothy), and that God would deliver them from their enemies (2 Thess 3:1-2). This prayer request, in turn, leads Paul to pray yet again: that God would enable the Thessalonians to continue in love and steadfast endurance (3:4-5).
In closing out his letter Paul offers an exhortation focusing on idleness (3:6-15). Interestingly, he had addressed this in his first letter (1 Thess 4:11; 5:12-14), but obviously not everyone listened (oh, surprise!). He warns the flock not to keep company with those who lead unruly, undisciplined lives (2 Thess 3:6). It might have been that some people thought, ‘Christ is coming back any second, so why bother?’ That might be true but Christ’s return should never lead to inactivity or be grounds for slothfulness! Such a lifestyle was neither taught nor modeled by Paul; in fact, he and his companions modeled exactly the opposite: hard work and a disciplined lifestyle (2 Thess 3:7-10). Paul is so serious about his warning that he commands the believers not to have fellowship with those who flagrantly disobey his apostolic edicts: so that the disobedient might eventually come to repentance (2 Thess 3:14-15). The prospect of disharmony leads Paul to pray a final time for the church’s peace (2 Thess 3:16), before picking up his quill and “signing off” on his letter to authenticate it—he had been dictating it (on the use of a secretary, see my blog on Ephesians 1).
Next up: the “Pastorals.”
1 THESSALONIANS
Like Romans, 1-2 Corinthians, and others, 1 Thessalonians is loaded with social-historical specificity: so all scholars agree that Paul wrote this letter. It was written shortly after Timothy came to Paul in Corinth, around AD 51-53. In terms of social-historical background, several factors prompted the Apostle to write his letter. Timothy had brought him news about the issues the church was facing: Paul was being slandered by the Jews in Thessalonica, Gentile believers were being persecuted by the Jews, as well as being tempted to walk in their old, pagan ways; there was growing confusion over the Second Coming and the End Times, the spiritual authority of leaders was in dispute, and some confusion existed over the practice of spiritual gifts.
The basic outline of the letter is: introduction (1:1-3), model behaviour (1:4-2:12), persecution (2:13-3:13), ethical exhortations (4:1-12), the 2nd Coming and the End (4:13-5:11), and closing comments (5:12-28). So, let’s trace Paul’s thought . . .
After his introduction, Paul begins by affirming the church for modeling the way Christians should live (1:5-9). By doing so, he says that they are imitating Paul, Silvanus and Timothy (i.e., “us”)—not to mention Jesus! As unbelievers they used to serve idols, but now they serve the living God (1 Thess 1:9). It is b/c of their stellar examples that they have gained such an excellent reputation with the other churches.
In chaps. 2-3, Paul describes how he and his comrades (Silvanus and Timothy) 1st modelled the same kind of example to the Thessalonians: despite opposition and persecution they continued to preach the gospel (2:2); their heart’s motivation was to please God rather than please people (1 Thess 2:4); in pleasing God they shared everything they had with the Thessalonians and were never a burden to them (2:8-10). What Paul says here is really noteworthy: he reminds the church that he didn’t just share the gospel with them, but he shared his very life with them (1 Thess 2:8). In other words, Paul wasn’t just the “hired gun,” who would travel into a town, preach the gospel, and then leave. His call to preach included “preaching”—i.e., sharing and investing—his life in those with whom he came in contact: the 2 sides to the “witnessing coin.” Question: Does your “coin” have both sides?
In seeing Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy model the way Christians are supposed to live, the Thessalonians took up the challenge and lived exemplary lives (2:14-16). In enduring persecution they were in the same boat as the persecuted Judean churches, who also suffered Jewish persecution. Yet Paul, like the ever-concerned “parent” that he is, expresses great concern—even anxiety—for them in this regard: will they persevere through their afflictions? Paul sent Timothy to check up on them (3:1-2) b/c he couldn’t. In fact, Paul says that he had tried a few times, but Satan thwarted him (1 Thess 2:18). Question: What do you think he means? What do you think being thwarted by Satan—God’s enemy—looked like? Paul learned from Timothy that the church was indeed persevering through all its trials, so Paul shares with them his relief and joy (1 Thess 3:6-10).
Having discussed their model living, Paul exhorts the church to continue to live morally upright lives (4:1-12). He tells them that despite their Graeco-Roman culture and context, they must live sexually pure lives and not return to their former, pagan lifestyle (1 Thess 4:1-5). He also says that they should continue to show love to everyone, and live fiscally responsible lives, not becoming a financial burden to people—especially those they’re trying to reach with the gospel (4:6-12). Question: Should Christians live off welfare/social assistance?
Paul had learned that the Thessalonian believers were confused about Jesus’ 2nd Coming and the End. Some people thought that it had already taken place. Others thought that Christians who were already dead would miss out on this supremely amazing event. Paul says not so: the 2nd Coming is still a future reality, and that the “dead in Christ” will definitely not miss out on it—in fact, they will be the 1st ones to meet Christ in the air (4:13-18). In terms of the End, Paul says to be extremely vigilant (1 Thess 5:1-3)! Its coming will be a surprise: so expect the unexpected!
Paul closes out his letter by addressing some local issues. The first is leadership. He tells the congregation, on the one hand, to respect its leaders and their work (1 Thess 5:12-13). He encourages the leaders, on the other hand, to exercise their duties appropriately (5:14). Paul corrects some faulty attitudes. He says don’t seek vengeance when wronged—rather seek the wrong-doer’s good (1 Thess 5:15). Apparently too many believers were walking around with a perma-frown, so Paul tells them to rejoice, and be thankful for what they have in Christ (1 Thess 5:16-18)! And finally, the more prophetic spiritual gifts were falling into some measure of disrepute. Paul essentially tells the church not to throw the baby out with the bathwater: respect the spiritual gift of prophecy, generally, but evaluate each prophetic utterance specifically: hold on to that which is good, let go of that which is not (1 Thess 5:19-21). The end.
Colossians
So, Colossians . . . Like Ephesians Colossians has a more general tone than the specificity of letters like Romans or Philippians (leading most mainstream scholars to reject Pauline authorship of Colossians). Hence, the historical background and occasion of this letter is more uncertain than other Pauline letters. It seems, though, that the author sought to address two problems. On the one hand, this Gentile church was being tempted to fall back into a pagan lifestyle and attitudes. On the other hand, they were beginning to accept heretical teaching: obeying the Mosaic Law and having an overinflated view of angels.
The basic outline of the letter is as follows: opening greeting (1:1-2), thanksgiving and prayer (1:3-14), the greatness of Christ extolled (1:15-29), the unpacking of the mystery of Christ (2:1-23), ethical exhortations (3:1-4:1), concluding remarks (4:2-9), and final greetings (4:10-18). Let’s now look at the flow of Paul’s thought.
He begins by extolling the Colossians’ faith in Christ (1:3-8). Their faith prompts him to pray for them (Col 1:9-12). Essentially, Paul prays that they would become more like Christ. He describes Christ-likeness in terms of being “filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom” and “walking in a manner worthy of the Lord.” Knowing God’s will is never just an intellectual exercise—it’s always a matter of the will: of choosing to do God’s will. Too many Christians approaching the issue of knowing God’s will from an experimental perspective: ‘I’ll see what it is 1st, then I’ll see if I want to do it.’ That’s a completely wrong attitude to have. We need to be committed to doing God’s will upfront. In other words, we should be “all in” even before the “cards” of God’s will have been dealt to us. Doing God’s will is true, biblical wisdom; in other words, the bible says that if you do God’s will you are wise; if you don’t you’re a fool!
Paul’s prayer prompts him to extol the surpassing greatness of Christ (Col 1:15-20). Many scholars believe that this short section of text (i.e., vv. 15-20) constitute a popular, early Christian hymn, which Paul is quoting. This little ditty describes Jesus in some extremely lofty terms. Jesus is God: Paul calls him the “image” or icon (in the Greek) of God; i.e., to see Jesus is to see God b/c Jesus is the “icon” of the invisible God. Paul says that Jesus is the Creator and the goal of creation. He is the Sustainer—without him creation would all fall apart—and Jesus is the Redeemer, having reconciling the lost to God through the cross. It is to this ministry of reconciliation that Jesus called Paul to be an apostle (1:25-29).
In chap. 2 Paul warns the church about succumbing to any kind of false philosophy. It seems that the false teachers in Colossae emphasized—or overemphasized—the role of angels (something that’s still common today!), and they preached obedience to the Mosaic Law. Question: What do you think would be the attraction for Gentiles to follow a set of Jewish laws? Paul tells his readers that the way to resist their false teaching is by recognizing Christ’s supremacy (Col 2:2, 9-10; cf. 1:15-20), by holding fast to apostolic teaching (Col 2:6), and by recognizing false philosophy for what it really is (Col 2:8): it is human wisdom not divine wisdom, consisting only of human rules and regulations, and it stands in complete opposition to the work of Christ. Re. the Mosaic Law: he says that physical circumcision required by the Law prophetically pointed forward to true circumcision: circumcision of the heart (Col 2:11; cf. Rom 2:28-29; Deut 30:6). In fact, Paul asserts that all of the Mosaic Law has come to its ultimate fulfilment and finds its greatest significance in Christ (Col 2:16-17).
Paul then goes on to offer some ethical exhortations in chap. 3. He says that Christian ethics must be based on the believer’s position in or union with Christ (Col 3:1-3); b/c of this spiritual union we must turn away from the sins of the old, sinful nature (Col 3:5-9). Instead, we should embrace the virtues of our new nature in Christ (3:10-17). These virtues make themselves felt in our different social relationships (3:18-4:1). Thus, wives should submit to their husbands, husbands must love their wives, children are to obey their parents, fathers ought not to exasperate their children, slaves should obey their (earthly) masters, and masters must treat their slaves well. Question: By addressing the issue of slavery in the way that he does here—i.e., he doesn’t call for its abolishment—does that mean that Paul actually approved of slavery?
In his closing remarks, it seems fitting that, having prayed for the church at the start of his letter, he now encourages them to pray—that they would be “devoted” to this task (Col 4:2). He also asks them to pray for him: for open doors to preach and for clarity in his message (Col 4:3-4). When it comes to reaching outsiders/unbelievers, we need “wisdom” (Col 4:5-6). As mentioned above, biblical wisdom is more life-oriented than knowledge-oriented: “wisdom” means living skilfully before watching eyes. In other words, in light of God and his revelation, how should you live? The wise person lives skilfully, i.e., they live according to God and his ways. Not to do so—not to change your life in light of God and his Word, not to align your life with his ways—only makes you a fool.
Philippians: 2
Paul began his letter by addressing the Philippian church’s disunity problem subtly: by addressing the church inclusively, by praying that their love for one another would grow, and by modeling the proper attitude Christians are supposed to have. He now addresses this issue more explicitly in 1:27-2:18, his Exhortation to Unity.
Paul calls on the church to be more unified as it endeavours to live out the gospel (Phil 1:27). Unity can be achieved by recognizing the centrality of the gospel (1:27); it can be achieved by recognizing the blessings that God offers his children (Phil 2:1-2); it can be achieved by putting the interests of others ahead of our own (Phil 2:3-4); it can be achieved by walking according to Jesus’ servant attitude (Phil 2:6-8). Ultimately, it is attained through the synergistic workings of human effort and divine grace (Phil 2:12-13). Most people view “working out your salvation” in v. 12b from an individualistic point of reference (e.g., doing devos), but really, it should be understood here communally. In other words, strictly speaking here, “working out your salvation” is done by serving others.
Having put Christ forward as the quintessential role model for leading a servant lifestyle (2:6-8), Paul then reinforces his message by using two people the church would have been really familiar with: Timothy and Ephaphroditus (2:19-30). One the one hand, Paul describes Timothy as distinguishing himself from other leaders in that he—like Paul—is fully devoted to seeking Christ’s interests first and foremost rather than his own (Phil 2:20-21). On the other hand, he describes how Ephaphroditus risked his own life for the sake of ministry, and, for the sake of helping other people out (Phil 2:30). These are the kind of leaders that the Philippians should hold in high honour (2:29)—rather than those who presently trouble them with their false teaching: à la chap. 3.
In chap. 3 Paul goes after these false teachers—even calling them “dogs” (Phil 3:2). Why are they “dogs”? B/c in preaching obedience to the Mosaic Law they preach a “gospel” of good works (e.g., Gentiles needing to be circumcised). We already saw in Galatians how Paul feels about a “gospel” of good works. Paul told the Galatians that anyone who preaches a “gospel” of good works is damned—under God’s curse (Gal 1:8-9). So in calling them “dogs,” Paul is actually being pretty nice!
In debunking their false teaching, Paul says that if we kept score of ‘Law brownie points,’ he’d win (Phil 3:4-6). But compared to the experience of knowing Jesus Christ personally, Paul counts all of his blue ribbons and trophies for keeping the Law as trash, garbage, as “dung,” literally (3:8).
These legal canines also claim that moral perfection can be attained in this life—which is why Paul takes great pains to assert the opposite: that even he has not reached perfection, and that he expects to use the rest of his life to chase after this lofty goal, never achieving it here on earth but only in heaven (Phil 3:11-14). Question: Why can’t we attain this goal on earth?
After he finishes off the false teachers, Paul returns to the matter of church unity (4:2-9). He offers a number of different ways to work towards spiritual unity: working together to solve problems (Phil 4:2-3), being gentle toward one another (Phil 4:5), praying (Phil 4:6-7), developing a virtuous thought life (Phil 4:8), and trying to emulate Paul (Phil 4:9).
In reflecting on their monetary gift to him (delivered by Ephaphroditus), Paul explains how both the giver of the gift and the recipient benefit from the gift (4:10-19). While Paul didn’t really need their gift, by giving to him the Philippians shared in his affliction; by sharing in his affliction they received apostolic blessing; and by receiving apostolic blessing, they will surely receive divine blessing—God will give back to them accordingly (Phil 4:19; cf. Luke 6:38).
Philippians: 1
Paul’s letter to the Philippians is maybe my favourite Pauline letter: it’s short (which I always find a plus!) but packed with nuggets of rich theology. Before looking at the text, let’s look at the social-historical context.
What we can deduce from the letter is this. Paul had been in financial need, so the Philippian church sent him a monetary gift, which they sent with Epaphroditus—who almost died in trying to help Paul out. As for the church at Philippi, there was a growing problem of disunity (hmm, sounds familiar!). There seemed to be a particularly acute division between the leadership and laity. Just to exacerbate the disunity situation, false teachers in Philippi were teaching the believers that they had to obey the Mosaic Law in order to follow Christ. So, Paul cuts a letter to help his dear friends, whom he had led to Christ some time earlier (see Acts 16). That Paul continued to enjoy a close relationship with this church is indicated by the letter’s overall, warm fuzzy tone.
The basic outline of letter is as follows: Introduction (1:1-11), The Preaching of the Gospel and the Glorification of Jesus (1:12-26), An Exhortation to Unity (1:27-2:18), An Update of Epaphroditus (2:19-30), An Exhortation to Press towards the Goal of Salvation (3:1-4:1), Final Exhortations to Unity (4:2-9), The Church’s Gift for Paul’s Need (4:10-19), and Final Closing (4:20-23). So let’s now follow Paul’s flow of thought.
Paul begins his letter by acknowledging the church’s participation in the gospel (1:1-8). It’s noteworthy that Paul uses the word, “all,” 5 times in just the first 8 verses; and in his opening salutation he specifically references the leadership and the laity (Phil 1:1)—something he never does anywhere else. This suggests that there was a rift between the leaders and the lay people; so Paul assumes nothing and explicitly addresses both groups right off the bat. Question: Are there any implications for us today for managing church conflict. As he does elsewhere (cf. Rom 15; 1 Thess 5), he prays for the church (Phil 1:9-11). The thrust of his prayer is that the believers’ love for each other would grow and continue to grow—obviously important if they are to become more unified! His prayer, then, addresses (albeit implicitly) their disunity problem.
Paul also implicitly addresses this issue by subtly offering in himself the model attitude for believers to have: an attitude where the gospel and the glorification of Christ remain central (1:12-26). Paul writes how while he was imprisoned some Christians were preaching the gospel to provoke him to jealousy: by doing what he could not do (being in prison), and by gaining a following at his expense. But rather than stew about the situation, Paul only cares that the gospel is being preached—regardless of the motives. Paul’s attitude was that the gospel should always be at the forefront of everything we do or do not do.
Similarly, Paul’s life concern is the glorification of Jesus (Phil 1:20-21); that is to say, living the Christian life isn’t about living for self, it’ about living for the Saviour—bringing honour to his name. It’s not about gaining success—it’s about glorifying the Saviour. And somewhat ironically, living a life focused on honouring Jesus leads to living a life seeking to serve others (1:22-26). By putting himself out there like this, Paul is hoping that his readers will follow suit; and if they do, the church will become more unified—because everybody will be running around serving each other!
If you remember in the NT Origins blog entry, I talked about how the chapter and verse divisions, introduced in the 16th century (with the advance of the printing press) sometimes obscure how best to understand a passage. This can be seen here: nearly every NT commentator sees Paul’s flow of thought extending from 1:27 to 2:18 (these verses together would have formed a much better “chap. 2” than the one we have). In this section, he moves from the subtle to the salient, as we’ll see next . . .
Ephesians: 3
So let’s talk turkey, i.e., application—Paul style! Paul offers a series of Exhortations to Unity and Virtue (4:1-6:9).
Like a lot of churches—back then as well as today—the Ephesians struggled with unity. Paul says that unity is achieved by walking according to your calling in Christ (Eph 4:1-3) and by choosing to imitate the unity in the Godhead (Eph 4:4-6). Re. this latter point: there is—always has been and always will be—perfect relational unity within the Godhead. God is 1 being who simultaneously co-exists in 3 distinct persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. There has never been any quarrelling amongst the members of the Trinity; no jealousy, no name-calling, no division, no 2-party cliques! There has always been perfect harmony between the Father and the Son, the Father and the Spirit, and between the Son and the Spirit. So Paul say, in effect, strive for that kind of relational unity amongst yourselve.
He also says that unity can be achieved when everyone uses their spiritual gifts and offices with the ultimate aim of becoming spiritually mature (4:7-16). Thus, God has created differences—in terms of spiritual gifts—in order, ironically, to bring about unity through spiritual maturity.
As perhaps implied by some of what Paul said in chap. 2, the believers at Ephesus probably struggled in terms of walking in and reflecting Christian virtue. Paul thus says, on the 1 hand, that Christian virtue can be achieved by choosing not to walk according to your former (i.e., non-Christian) lifestyle: e.g., refrain from sexual immorality and greed (Eph 4:17-19, 22). Rather, on the other hand, Christian virtue can be achieved by choosing to walk according to your new life in Christ (Eph 4:23-24). Christian virtue involves forgiving each other (Eph 4:26-27, 32). Christian virtue can also be heard—in other words, Christians ought to speak in a Christ-honouring way (Eph 4:29-31).
In chap. 4 Paul spoke of relationships generally; in 5 and 6, he focuses on specific relationships. In order to reflect the virtues of Christ in these specific relationships (as well as any other for that matter) we need to be filled with the Holy Spirit (Eph 5:18). Perhaps 2 of the biggest indicators of being “filled with the Spirit” are: speech and control. Spirit-empowered speech is clearly 1 of the marks of being filled with the Spirit, e.g., bold sharing of the gospel (Act 4:31). Question: Can you think of other examples of Spirit-empowered speech? Another indicator of being filled with the Spirit is self—i.e., Spirit-control. This is implied by the Greek word for “filled”: whatever “fills” a person controls that person—whether it be anger, fear, or anything else. To be “filled” with/by the Holy Spirit, then, is to be controlled by him in your speech, actions, attitudes, etc.
Paul says that Spirit-empowered relationships are marked by mutual encouragement and submission (5:19-21). So here in the passage, the encouragement—Eph 5:19—is the Spirit-empowered speech, while the submission—Eph 5:21—is indicative of Spirit-control. Among wives and husbands: wives should submit to their husbands—the way the church ought to submit to Christ (5:22-24). Husbands, for their part, should love their wives—the way Christ loved the church, sacrificing himself on her behalf (5:25-31). Among children and parents: children should obey their parents, while parents—particularly fathers—shouldn’t exasperate children, but rather instruct them in the Lord (6:1-4). Among slaves and masters: slaves should obey their masters as if serving Christ, while masters should treat slaves well since Christ is everyone’s Master (6:6-9).
In drawing his letter to a close, Paul gives the church a glimpse of the happenings in the invisible, spiritual realm of angels and demons (6:10-20). The Apostle say that a battle rages around us in the spiritual realm, a battle that often can make itself felt in the physical (or space-time) realm in which we live (Eph 6:12). Question: Can you think of any examples of this effect in your own life? In light of that battle we need to be ready to engage with the dark powers at work against us. Therefore, we need to dress for the occasion: in God’s armour (Eph 6: 13-17). Notice: it’s God’s armour not ours—we cannot stand against demonic forces in our own strength!
Last but certainly not least, in light of the battle we need to pray (Eph 6:18-20). We need to pray specifically. Specific prayers lead to specific—easily recognizable—answers to prayer (which increase our faith). We need to pray led by the Holy Spirit, i.e., according to his direction in a matter—which can be quite different than ours. Question: Can you think of a time when God showed you that you were asking him for something quite different than what he wanted to do? And we need to pray for other believers actively engaged in the fight—those on the front lines. They especially need and covet our prayers.
Paul’s final benediction (Eph 6:24) in keeping with his earlier predestination motif, is quite particular: he issues God’s grace only for those who “love Jesus”—implying, it’s not for those who don’t (love Jesus).
Ephesians: 2
After Paul’s opening greeting (1:1-2), he launches into this lengthy Praise and Prayer (1:3-23).
He begins by extolling the salvation that Christians share (1:3-14). He describes how salvation is completely by God’s sovereign decree/predetermination (Eph 1:4-5). In other words, people come to faith in Christ b/c God has sovereignly predestined them to come to faith in Christ (Paul speaks this way in many other places, e.g., Rom 9:11-18; Phil 1:29; 2 Thess 2:13). Think about that for a minute. Question: What goes through your mind when you hear/read that? Many people reject the notion of predestination b/c it sounds “unfair.” The idea of unfairness, however, stems from a failure to grasp God’s holiness and human sinfulness, on the one hand, and divine grace on the other.
Holiness, i.e., moral purity, is not just one of God’s preferences (you know, “Would you like fries with that, God?”). Moral purity is fundamental to his very being, his nature. He is, by his own definition and declaration, a “holy God” (e.g., Lev 19:1-2). As such, he cannot ignore sin. We tend to downplay sin. He cannot. He would have to disown himself—all that he is in his very essence—in order to ignore sin. It’s not just that he will not (i.e., he could ignore it but chooses not to)—he cannot! Hence, he must punish wrongdoers. B/c God is infinitely holy/morally pure, even just one little “white lie” deserves his eternal condemnation. We think, “Just 1 white lie in 75 years of living? That’s not fair!” But if you could get a grasp of the picture the bible paints of how infinitely and majestically holy God is, you wouldn’t think that. You couldn’t think that. But people only think that way b/c they think of God in their own image (like a cosmic superman), rather than the reverse. If every sin deserves divine condemnation, then every sinner is justly punished: hell is what we all deserve. But grace, “unmerited favour,” is by definition getting what we don’t deserve. So, we all deserve hell, but God chooses to save some from getting what they deserve (hell), and giving them what they don’t deserve (eternal life). So how is predestination, then, not fair? If you say, well, he needs to pick everyone, you’re not getting it. Re-read what I’ve just said. God doesn’t owe salvation to anyone! He owes everyone eternal punishment. Hence, those whom he eternally punishes get exactly what their sins deserve. Those whom he saves are getting exactly the opposite of what they deserve—that’s grace; that’s salvation: that’s Eph 2:8.
Why does God choose to save some? Paul says here (and elsewhere) it is for the sake of God’s glory (Eph 1:5-6; cf. Eph 2:7; Rom 9:23). It’s also why he chooses not to save everyone: God is glorified by saving sinners, and he is also glorified by punishing sinners (Rom 9:21-23). The cross, then, simultaneously reveals that God is a God of infinite holiness and infinite love.
Paul offers praise to God b/c Christians have been sealed by God’s Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13-14)—which is a promise of even better things to come! He then moves from praise to prayer for his readers (1:15-23). In sum, he prays that believers might come to know God more intimately (1:17), that we might come to know how rich we are spiritually (1:18), and that we might come to know more of God’s power in our lives (1:19-23). Question: Have you ever prayed like that for yourself or for someone else?
In the 2nd and 3rd chapters Paul discusses the Mystery of Salvation and its Results. He says that Christians have been saved from God’s holy wrath (Eph 2:1-3). It is b/c of our sinfulness and our sins that we fully deserve God’s wrath. The picture is very bleak. Paul doesn’t describe us as simply being “asleep in our sins” or “sick in our sins”—we are “dead in our sins”! We commit acts of sin b/c we are sinners by our fallen nature; and we are proven to be sinners by the sins we commit. It’s a horribly circular immoral condition from which we suffer. Dead men can’t do a thing. We’re completely stuck. But hallelujah, God made spiritually dead people spiritually alive in Christ (Eph 2:5-6)! We are justified before a holy, holy, holy God by his grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (2:8-10). But not only is individual salvation one of the fruits of redemption, but so is a new communal identity. In other words, Gentiles have become part of “Israel”—God’s holy covenant people—in Christ (2:11-19), a people founded upon the gospel and upon the divinely appointed leaders most closely associated with the preaching of the gospel, viz., the apostles/prophets (2:20-22).
Having described the fruits of salvation through the gospel, Paul explains the mystery of the gospel. While elements of the gospel had been preached by the prophets of the OT, most of what they preached was a mystery even to them (1 Pet 1:10-12; cf. Eph 3:9-10). God has now chosen to reveal the contents of this mystery through the apostles of his Son Jesus Christ (3:4-5). Paul declares that the mystery of the gospel is that Gentiles and Jews are now united as one people in Christ (3:6). Now you might think, “Ho, hum,” but back in that day (and before that), such a notion—especially for Jews—was absolutely incomprehensible! In light of this mystery and in light of the bold access Christians now have to God (3:12), Paul prays again for the church: that we would experience God’s power to become like Christ (Eph 3:14-16), and that we would know in a real way God’s love for us (Eph 3:17-19). Question: Since this and Paul’s earlier prayer are enshrined in scripture, how does their inspiration affect our prayer life if we pray these prayers?
Having begun with “theory,” Paul begins to talk turkey (i.e., application) in the 2nd half of the letter . . .
Ephesians: 1
I ended my previous blog entry referring to the author of Ephesians as “Paul,” i.e., in quotes. Why the quotes? Before getting into Ephesians I think it’s worth pausing to discuss briefly the idea of Pauline authorship of NT letters.
If you take the NT at face value, Paul wrote Romans, 1–2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1–2 Thessalonians, 1–2 Timothy, Titus, and Philemon: 13 canonical letters in total. But most mainstream NT scholars hold that while all of these letters bear Paul’s name, he only wrote—for certain—7: Romans, 1–2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. Pauline authorship of the rest is doubtful, they say, and these were probably written by disciples of Paul but not by the apostle himself.
Without boring you with too much of the details, the essential criteria for determining authenticity are format (Does the text match the literary pattern of known texts?), internal data (Are there internal clues as to the text’s authorship?), style (Are the writing styles similar/dissimilar?), vocabulary (Is there a repository of shared words? Is there a repository of different words?), theology (Do the author’s religious presuppositions or beliefs match with that of known texts?), and external data (Has the text’s authorship been attested by early church leaders?). Many mainstream NT scholars put the Pauline letters through this grid and come out with the results mentioned above. So, for example, some scholars doubt the veracity of Pauline authorship for Ephesians b/c its overall tone is quite general with few historical details describing the situation in Ephesus, compared with the specificity of historical context in 1 Corinthians, Philippians, Galatians, etc.
I, for one, think there are numerous reasons which could account for these sorts of differences, so I don’t necessarily see a need to play the non-Pauline authorship card. Let me offer one reason. It’s clear that Paul (like many other early authors) used an amanuensis, i.e., a personal “secretary” (e.g., Rom 16:22; cf. 1 Cor 16:21). The question would then be: How much freedom to write did Paul grant his secretary? If he granted him only a little, then the letter would sound very Pauline in style, vocabulary, etc. If, however, Paul used a secretary in whom his trust was great, then he could have given him a lot more freedom and latitude in recording the apostle’s thoughts, in which case, the letter would not sound so Pauline in style, vocabulary, etc. But Paul would still have read and signed off on it b/c the letter correctly recorded his thoughts/ideas! Question: In what way/s would this idea of a secretary affect the doctrines of divine revelation, inspiration, and inerrancy?
Anyways, when we come to Ephesians, b/c it’s more general sounding in tone it’s harder to discern the social-historical context and occasion (i.e., the reason) for the letter. The general tone and lack of historical specificity maybe suggests that this first-century letter was meant to circulate beyond Ephesus to nearby congregations (e.g., Col 4:16) to instruct these churches in some of the foundational truths of Christianity.
The basic structure of the letter would be as follows: Opening Greeting (1:1-2), Praise and Prayer (1:3-23), The Mystery of Salvation and its Results (2:1-3:21), Exhortations to Unity and Virtue (4:1-6:9), Concluding Remarks (6:10-22), and Final Benediction (6:23-24).
We’ll get to the text next.
Galatians: 2
1 of the cardinal doctrines of Evangelicalism is the doctrine of justification by faith alone. That is to say, the sole means by which a fallen human being can be declared righteous by a holy God is by putting his/her faith in Jesus Christ—alone. No amount of good works can move God’s heart to declare a person just in his sight. Our only hope is faith in Christ alone. This is Paul’s gospel, which he began (cf. Acts) preaching to Jews—who, obviously, were zealous about doing the good works of the Mosaic Law (cf. Rom 10:1-3). Having defended his apostleship to the Galatians (chaps. 1-2), Paul defends his gospel message in chaps. 3 & 4.
He begins the defence of justification by faith by arguing from experience. By using a series of questions that all have the same answer, Paul declares that the Galatians were converted to Christ by faith not by obeying the Law (Gal 3:2). He reminds them that they suffered b/c of their belief in a gospel of justification by faith not a gospel of works (Gal 3:4). He reminds them that the miracles that took place in their midst were done by faith in Christ not by obeying the Law (Gal 3:5). He reminds them how by believing in Christ they had been set them free from the idols that had previously enslaved them (Gal 4:6-10). Question: Does Paul’s argument imply more generally, that it’s legitimate to argue for Christianity through your own subjective experience?
Paul then defends his gospel by arguing from scripture. He states that Abraham was justified before there ever was a law to be obeyed (Gal 3:6-9). While Abraham was blessed and the purveyor of blessings, the Mosaic Law brought about divine curses—at least for those who failed to obey any part of it (Gal 3:10-12). In terms of chronology, which came first: the chicken or the egg? Paul states that the covenant God made with Abraham came before the Law covenant, hence, it supersedes it (Gal 3:15-17). Further, Christ’s fulfilment of the Abrahamic covenant, many years after its establishment, annuls the place of the Mosaic Law. That is b/c of the purpose of the Law: God established the Law to lead people to Christ (Gal 3:22-25). In other words, the Mosaic Law when rightly understood teaches, on the one hand, that we simply cannot live up to the standard of God’s holy laws; and it teaches, on the other, that we need God to provide—since we cannot—us some other way of fulfilling his standard. In a bit more confusing section of his letter (4:21-31), Paul seems to be taking up his opponents’ allegorical interpretation of Mt. Sinai and Jerusalem, turning it on its head to show the exact opposite of what his rivals supposed, viz., that those who adhere to his gospel are spiritually free and the true heirs to Abraham’s son Isaac, while those who adhere to a gospel of works are spiritually enslaved, and are more akin to Hagar and her slave son, Ishmael.
Now clearly, if Paul preaches a gospel without borders (so to speak) then it’s easy to see how some people would misunderstand (or even twist) his message as giving them license to live like the world, the flesh, and the devil (cf. Rom 6:1, 15). So Paul cuts off this faulty line of thinking by describing some of the ethical implications of his gospel (chaps. 5-6). Paul affirms that believers are indeed free from the demands of the Mosaic Law (5:1-15). Nevertheless, we’re still obligated to live morally responsibly lives. But Paul cannot command this by simply invoking laws like “do not steal,” “do not lie,” “do not commit adultery”—b/c he’s taken great pains in the previous chapters to destroy the Mosaic Law’s place in the life of the believer. So what’s an apostle to do? Since he cannot invoke the Law, he appeals to life in the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:16, 25). A life lived in the flesh leads to moral chaos (Gal 5:19-21); but a life lived in the Spirit, and led by the Spirit, leads to Christian virtues (Gal 5:22-23). Question: Paul states that our fleshly desires and the Spirit’s desires are at war within us. So, how can we weaken one side and “help” the other so that we win this war?
Life in the Holy Spirit is not simply about experiencing individual blessings from God. Life in the Spirit entails communal obligations (6:1-10). So, Spirit-empowered believers will gently seek to restore brothers/sisters who have slipped into sin (Gal 6:1). Spirit-empowered believers will seek to help carry the spiritual burdens of other brothers/sisters (Gal 6:2). Spirit-empowered believers will seek to persevere in doing good (6:6-10).
Paul then closes out his small—at least compared to Romans and 1–2 Corinthians—but powerful letter with a harsh final warning (6:11-18). He states that his opponents who have been troubling the Galatians are actually cowards: they preach what they do so that they do not become targets of persecution (Gal 6:12). He also says they are hypocrites: they don’t even practice what they preach (Gal 6:13); they’re only looking for boasting rights. And in the end, their “gospel” of circumcision amounts to and accomplishes absolutely nothing before God, who transforms the people who accept Christ alone into brand new creations (Gal 6:15).
Next up: “Paul’s” Letter of Ephesians.