Isaiah and the Nations

Isaiah and the Nations

Isaiah Chapters 13-23

Against the Nations

The psalm found in Isaiah Chapter 12 marks the end of a major section of the book which dealt directly with the fate of the people of Judah. The section assigned for the current lesson deals most directly with the nations surrounding Judah. Whereas in the previous section the nations were tools employed in the plan of God for Israel (8:6-8, for example) the overt theme of the current chapters is one of the inescapable plan of God for all nations.

The nations specifically mentioned in these chapters are Babylon (13:1;17-19) Assyria (14:24-25) Moab (15:1-3) Damascus (17:1-3) Cush (18:1) Egypt (19:1) and Tyre (23:1). This collection of prophecies regarding the enemies of Israel is similar to that found in Jeremiah (Jeremiah 46:1-3; 47:1-3; 48:1, etc.) and in Ezekiel (Ezekiel 25:1-2, 8, 12, 15, etc.). In fact, the word of God through Isaiah concerning Moab (16:6-11) is very similar to the word sent through Jeremiah (Jeremiah 48:29-36). In addition to these three extended passages in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel there are shorter passages in Amos (Amos 1:1-3, 9-13) and in Zephaniah (Zephaniah 2:9-13).

It is unlikely that these sections represent chronologically-connected prophecies. That is, they do not represent a phase in the ministry of the prophet that was directed to the nations. Instead, these prophecies are grouped thematically to indicate the role the nations will play in the coming “Day of the Lord.”

A Cruel Day

The concept of the “Day of the Lord” is central to Jewish prophecy. The idea is spoken of in Jeremiah (Jeremiah 46:10) Ezekiel (Ezekiel 30:1-3) Joel (Joel 2:1-2) Amos (Amos 5:18-20) Obadiah (Obadiah 1:15) Zephaniah (Zephaniah 1:14) and Malachi (Malachi 4:5-6). Though he does not use the title “The Day of the Lord” Jesus also speaks of that day (Mark 13:1-8). His answer to the disciples who ask when the day will come seems paradoxical, for he says that there are obvious signs for us to read (Mark 13:28-29) but on he also says that no one, not even he, knows when it will happen (Mark 13:32).

In our passage on the nations, the prophet speaks of this day as a cruel day of wrath and fierce anger (13:9). We have no trouble with the concept of the wrath of God (as long as it is directed to someone else) but there is something theologically troubling with the anger of God. As we understand anger, it is an emotional state that might be justified and that is used to justify behavior that would otherwise not be acceptable. Further, if you are the one who made me angry, then I can blame my unacceptable behavior on you.

If wrath might be somewhat understandable and anger somewhat troublesome, the idea of God being cruel goes beyond all our understanding. In fact, the Bible itself decries cruelty. When Jacob was an old man near death, he called his sons to him to offer then his blessings and to speak prophecy to them. The words Jacob offered to Simeon and Levi (Genesis 49:5-7) are striking in their similarity to the description Isaiah gives of the Day of the Lord – that is, behavior which the Bible says is unacceptable in us is acceptable in God. That difference in itself (the difference between human behavior and divine behavior) is the key to understanding the “cruelty” of the Day of the Lord.

Strike Them and Heal Them

In earlier chapters we noted the motif of the outstretched hand of the Lord (see 5:25, for example). Amid the prophecy against Assyria, the motif reappears (14:26-27) along with the statement that the judgment of the Lord is not just for Assyria (the current context) or Judah (the previous context) but part of a plan for the entire world. We hear more of this plan in the oracle against Egypt, where the refrain of “in that day” abruptly shifts from one of judgment to one of salvation (19:19-25). In this passage, the prophet says of God's interaction with Egypt “He will strike them and he will heal them.” This is not the capricious action of a fickle god, but the inseparable judgment and love of the Lord God Almighty.

The words of this passage are worth particular consideration. The word translated “turn” in the NIV and “return” in the KJV is the same root word which is elsewhere translated “repent”, and it is one half of an illustrative word pair. The word for translated as “sin” means, roughly, “to miss the mark”. This is powerfully simple: we know what is right, but we fail to do it. The word for “repent” means to turn around, or to return. As such is more than admission of sin, more than being sorry for the sin, but to turn away from the sin and toward God.

Another word we must consider is the one (and, yes, it is only one word) translated “will respond to their pleas” in the NIV and “shall be entreated of” in the KJV. The verb is the same verb which is elsewhere interpreted as “pray” or “entreat” but in this case the verb is applied to the Lord, indicating that the Lord will respond to the prays of the people. The ESV makes the point even more strongly when it says that the Lord “will listen to their pleas for mercy…” The word “mercy” is important here because it is what is missing from the more disturbing passages regarding the Day of the Lord. The most disturbing word applied to that day is “cruel” but we must understand the meaning of the word in this context. We may understand cruelty as something sadistic, taking pleasure in the cruel treatment of others, but the word also means to act without mercy. When we speak of mercy in human terms, their may be little difference between those who show mercy and those who do not, but to be separated from the love of God is a terrible thing.

This is the Plan

In Romans (11:11-12) Paul tells us that even the rejection of God by the people of Israel did not alter the plan of God. Israel is still not beyond redemption, and God has used their rejection to benefit the entire world. Isaiah preaches a similar message: there are bad things happening, and horrible things to come, but no situation is beyond the redemption of God.

In a lesson of what it means to turn the other cheek, when Joseph's brothers had sold him into slavery, Joseph could not be angry with them, because what they intended for evil, God intended for good (Genesis 50:18-20).

Immanuel

Immanuel

Isaiah Chapters 7-12

 

The Nature of Prophecy

The chapters we are given for our lesson today contain many powerful passages with which we are very familiar, even though we are more familiar with them in the context of their New Testament fulfillment, rather than their Old Testament origin. We are, for instance very familiar with the prophecy of the birth of Christ:

Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14b KJV)

The Old Testament context, however (Isaiah 7:10-15) is less familiar to us. For those of us who are familiar with the New Testament context, it is very striking that in its original context, the prophecy is very clearly given as a sign to Ahaz as a sign which would be fulfilled in his lifetime. In the context of Isaiah, the term that is translated “virgin” simply means “young woman.” It is not until the sign is interpreted in the New Testament context (Matthew 1:18-25) that the idea of “virgin birth” is applied.

What, then, is the nature of prophecy? A prophet is one who speaks to us the word of God to us, and sometimes one who speaks to God on our account. This dual role began with Abraham (Genesis 20:1-7) who spoke freely with God and in whom God established tradition for many generations to come. But how does prophecy work? If Isaiah's prophecy of the child that was to be born is so important to us today, why is it that the prophecy of the Lord whistling for flies and using a hired razor almost meaningless to us? (Isaiah 7:18-25)

Today we are called a people of the Book. We believe in that scripture is the true word of God, sufficient for salvation. But we cannot limit God to this book, and certainly not to our understanding of it (John 21:25). Even the Bible is a thing of this world which came into being and may pass away, but the Word of God always been and will always be (John 1:1-5; Isaiah 40:8; Mark 13:31). Who knows if we may see the prophecy of the hired razor fulfilled in our lifetime, either to all of us as a nation or to any of us individually? The word of God is not letters on a page which are printed today and discarded tomorrow, but as active, unchanging presence in our lives.

The Zeal of the Lord Almighty

Chapter 9 also begins with a very familiar passage (9:2-7). And again, the Old Testament context of the passage, as expressed in the middle section, is not so familiar to us. In this passage, the prophet speaks with such confidence in the word of the Lord that he presents his message in the present tense, so that a child is born, and a son is given. A word from the Lord is a deed already done. But the zeal of the Lord is a sword which cuts both ways, and though the prophet speaks with assurance the blessings that are already real, he speaks as assuredly of the judgment which is at hand. This judgment is expressed in the refrain of a motif introduced in Chapter 5 (verse 25) and repeated throughout Chapter 9 and into Chapter 10 (9:12; 9:17; 9:21; 10:4).

Chapter 11 begins with more familiar passages (11:1-9) which reemphasizes the inseparable nature of the love of God and the judgment of God. The same righteousness that condemns the powerful will redeem the needy and the judgment which destroys the wealthy will support the poor. In that day, the balance of the earth itself, destroyed in the Garden of Eden will be restored by the full knowledge of the Lord, as waters that cover the sea (Romans 8:22).

Immanuel

The entirety of Chapter 12 is a psalm to the Lord, whose anger has become comfort This is a reminder that the unchanging love of God is a terror to those who reject it, and the strength of those who accept it. This chapter also speaks of the power of the very name of God, which in Old Testament time was held in such high regard that it did not even have a spoken form. In consideration of the import placed on names in the time of Isaiah, we should consider the way names are used in the book of Isaiah.

In Chapter 8 we are given a reminder of the earlier statement “Here am I. Send me!” (6:8) as Isaiah says “Here I am, and the children the Lord has given me. We are signs and symbols…” (8:18) And so we have the name “Isaiah” which means “Yahweh is Salvation.” Isaiah's two sons also have symbolic names: the name of the older son (which means “a remnant will”) is symbolic of the prophecy that a remnant of the people will turn again to God and be saved. The name of the younger son (quick plunder, swift spoil) is more enigmatic and not so easily understood.

Then, of course, there is the name “Immanuel” which means “God is with us”. In fact, in the passage in Isaiah 8:6-10 we see the same word used first as a name and then as a benediction. As we have already seen, the Gospel of Matthew (1:22-23) tells us that the birth of Jesus fulfilled the prophecy of the one who will be called Immanuel.

There is some similarity in the names, even though they do not sound at all alike to us. “Jesus” is the English form of the Latin rendering of the Greek translation of the Hebrew name that is spelled (in English letters) “Yehoshua”. The name “Joshua” is the English version of the same name. That is, “Jesus” and “Joshua” are both English forms of the same name. The former is used in New Testament settings (which come to us by way of Greek and Latin) and the latter in Old Testament settings (which come to us more directly from the Hebrew). In any case, the name (“Jesus” or “Joshua”) means “The Lord Saves.”

Was Matthew simply stretching the point a bit by telling us the name “Jesus” and the name “Immanuel” had meanings similar enough that the former name could fulfill the prophecy in regard to the latter? I think not. Matthew was well-acquainted with Old Testament prophecy, as evidenced by the more than forty references found in his gospel to the way Jesus fulfilled the prophecy concerning the Christ. Instead, I think Matthew was telling us something new. We have already mentioned that, in the setting in Isaiah, the reference to the “virgin” was not intended to indicate virgin birth. Further, the Jewish scholars and teachers did not (and still do not) see the passage in Isaiah as having messianic import.

However Isaiah may have understood his own prophecy and however it may have been understood until the time of Christ, it is through the witness of Matthew that we understand the prophecy of Isaiah as fulfilled in the life of Jesus, and we are able to call our Lord “Immanuel, Wonderful Counselor, the Prince of Peace.”

 

Send Me

Send Me

Isaiah Chapters 5&6

He Looked for Justice, but Saw Bloodshed

In verses 1-7 of Chapter 5 begin as a song. The song should be a love song, and it begins as such, with the analogy of the Beloved and his vineyard. But the song goes wrong almost from the beginning, as the vineyard is established and lovingly tended by the Beloved, but yields only bad fruit.

The role of the singer is an odd one, as he begins singing to the Beloved or of the Beloved, but as quickly as the love song goes wrong, the prophet singer begins to give voice to the Beloved. In a manner similar to the rebuke Nathan gave to David (2 Samuel 12:1-13) or the way Jesus questioned the chief priests and elders regarding his Parable of the Tenants (Luke 20:9-16) the singer, on behalf of the Beloved, asks the people of God to witness the failure of the vineyard. As in the first chapter (1:11-13) the injury of the Beloved is not in the face of the people’s worship, but in the fact of their worship: the Beloved looked for justice but found bloodshed, and looked for righteousness and heard cries of despair.

Woe to You

In the remainder of the chapter, what should have been a love song completely deteriorates. What had been words of praise become words of condemnation. We have not the time or space to go into each of these, but the first (verses 8-9) seems particularly relevant today. As today, the people of Isaiah’s day put their trust in material wealth, which is just one of the ways we abandon out God and put our trust in ourselves. This self-reliance is spoken of more directly in verses 20-21, where the prophet speaks of those who pursue their own morality and their own wisdom. In an image that will recur in following chapters, verse 25 speaks of the outstretched hand of the Lord, which remains outstretched, even though the people have suffered greatly.

This combined image of the redeeming God of love and the angry God of judgment is a recurring theme of Old Testament prophecy. In Jeremiah 23:19-20 (and repeated in 30:23-24) the prophet speaks of terrible judgment that comes from the heart of the Lord. Jesus also (in John 12:44-50, for example) spoke of the way in which his mission was one of love for those who accepted it and at the same time condemnation for those who rejected it, and following the Parable of the Tenants (Luke 20:17-20) Jesus speaks of the stone rejected by the builders which has become the cornerstone. This image comes not only from Psalm 118:22, but is repeated in Isaiah (8:14; 28:16).

Holy, Holy, Holy

Chapter 6, verses 1-4 begin one of the very familiar passages of Isaiah. Chapter 1 verse 1 tells us that Isaiah’s prophetic ministry spanned the reign of four kings of Judah, beginning with the reign of Uzziah. There is a confusion of names with regard to Uzziah. In 2 Kings 15:1-7, we read of a Azariah, son of Amaziah who was anointed King of Judah at age sixteen and who continued to reign through his son after Amaziah himself was afflicted with leprosy. 2 Chronicles provides much more detail of the reign of King Uzziah, son of Amaziah, who was became king at age sixteen (2 Chronicles 26:1-5) and who had a confrontation with a priest named Azairah during which Uzziah broke out with leprosy and continued to reign through his son.

Whatever his name was, Uzziah or Azariah, he was good king whose reign provided Judah with a great deal of stability at a time when the kingdoms of Israel and Judah were in perilous decline. The death of such a great king was of enormous impact to the people of Judah and it left them in doubt as to their present security and future identity.

In this setting, the prophet Isaiah has a vision of the true King, the Lord Almighty, a reminder that though the people have put their trust in various kings who came and went, and were better or worse, the true, lasting King is the Lord God Almighty, whose reign is greater than any earthly king, and whose identity remains constant, and whose security will never fail. Perhaps it is an idea that is applicable to any age, but it certainly seems uniquely applicable to our own age. Whatever we may think of our current security or our future prospect, we must remember that whether they are relatively good or relatively bad, our security and identity comes not from our elected leaders, but from the Lord God Almighty, and the whole earth, no matter what our evaluation of it may be, is full of the glory of the Lord.

Woe to Me!

Chapter 6 ends (verse 13) with a bleak message of hope. The hand of the Lord remains outstretched, and when only a tenth of the people will remain, the land will again be laid waste. The people of the Lord will be as saplings which spring up from the stump of a fallen tree.

But before this darkly hopeful proclamation, the prophet Isaiah, who has been speaking to the people for the Lord, begins to speak to the Lord as a representative of that frail remnant of the people who remain true to their Lord. In verse 5, as Isaiah has been speaking for the Lord to the people decrying “woe to you” he now finds himself in the holy presence of the Lord and says of himself, as we must all say of ourselves, I am unclean, and I live among a people who are unclean. Woe to me!

Send Me!

Any encounter we have with the pure, holy, and unchanging presence of the Lord will leave us changed. In the very setting of the inescapable judgment of the Lord, the prophet in verses 6-8 encounters the ever-present redemption of the Lord. Though it is with a coal of fire, the prophets lips are cleaned. After the cleansing, he is able to hear the Lord say “Whom shall I send?” and to answer “Here am I, send me!”

Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. (John 20:21 KJV)

Come Now, Let Us Reason Together

Come Now, Let Us Reason Together

Isaiah Chapters 1-4

Isaiah son of Amoz

Our survey of the book of Isaiah will be quite fast-paced, as evidenced by the four chapters we are covering in this lesson. We will find the book of Isaiah, or at least sections of it, very familiar to us, not only because the prophecy of Isaiah has inspired hymns and other songs, but also because Isaiah is the book most often quoted in the New Testament to relate the life of Jesus to prophecy regarding the Christ. This is especially true of the Gospel according to Matthew (see: Matthew 3:1-3; 8:16-17; 12:14-21; 13:10-15; 15:7-9).

However, while much of the scripture of Isaiah is familiar to us, we know little about the man himself. The introduction of Chapter 1 (verse 1) indicates that the ministry of Isaiah spanned the reigns of the Judean kings Uzziah, Jothan, Ahaz, and Hezekia. His interaction with Hezekia is recorded in 2 Kings (20:1-7) and in more briefly in 2 Chronicles (32:20-22). For most of the prophets, we have a fair amount of biographical detail. For example, we have many biographical details for Jeremiah (Jeremiah 26:7-9) some of which are inseparable from the prophecy of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 13:1-11). The prophecy of Hosea is also highly biographical (Hosea 3:1-4), and of Jonah we know a brief section of his life story, but almost nothing of his preaching.

As we do not know much about the prophet, we do not know very much about the origin of the book that bears his name. There is general agreement Bible scholars that the book has either two or three distinct sections, each with their own editor, and perhaps completely separate authorship. I am certainly not a Bible scholar, but I do a few opinions regarding such literary analysis.

1. Whatever we believe about the origin of scripture, we should not be ignorant of any theories posed by serious, learned authorities, especially those who are dedicated Christians.

2. The value of such scholarship only exists insofar as it contributes to the understanding of the message of the work in question.

3. Such scholarship does not in any way threaten the authority of scripture. We do not have the original texts, and if we did, there would be few of us who could read them. Our faith in scripture is a faith in the process which began with the original inspiration, continues through the establishment of cannon and the development of our modern translations, and culminates with our inspired reading and study.

With these considerations in mind, we will begin to address the book itself.

Hear, O Heavens!

The first chapter of Isaiah establishes the situation of the people with respect to their God. In the beginning section (verses 2-4) the Lord says even the beasts know to whom they belong, but the people have rejected their God. The following verses (5-6) that ask the people why they continue to harm themselves are similar to the passage in Jeremiah (30:12-3) where the Lord describes the people of having a wound that cannot be cured. They are in am impossible situation and they have deserted their Lord, who alone can do the impossible.

Further on (verses 11, ff.) the chapter finds agreement with the prophet Hosea (6:6) declaring that the rituals of worship have no meaning if the people have abandoned their Lord. Even in such grievous sin, the Lord has not deserted the people, and we have in this chapter one of the best known and most reassuring passages:

Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

(Isaiah 1:18 KJV)

Swords into Plowshares

Chapters 2, 3, and 4, have in common their description of the Day of the Lord. The vision given to Isaiah with regard to this day is twofold. On the one hand, there is in the latter part of Chapter 2 and continuing through Chapter 3 and into Chapter 4 the description of the awesome day when the people will flee to the mountains (2:19-22; Hosea 10:8; Luke 23:30). On the other hand, this section describing destruction and devastation the Day of the Lord will bring is bookended by the restoration and hope that are also a part of that day. In Chapter 4, this hope is expressed in the form of a branch, or remnant of the people who will be found righteous and to whom the presence of the Lord will be a real and will provide guidance an shelter.

In Chapter 2, the verses which look forward to the Day of the Lord also express hope, in words that are evocative of real peace even to those who are not familiar with the Bible.

And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

(Isaiah 2:2-4 KJV)

According to My Gospel

According to My Gospel

Romans 16

Pheobe

It is stylistic of Paul to begin letters with a general blessing and end them with a section of personal greeting, and his letter to the Romans, as we can observe from the number of personal greetings included in this final chapter, is true to this style. While this final chapter seems straight-forward enough, there is in fact much debate regarding this chapter, and we should not be ignorant of that debate.

First, there is Paul’s mention of Phoebe, to whom Paul refers as a “servant”. The Greek word that is used here is diakonos which is the word our Lord used in telling his disciples that the first shall be last, and the greatest must be a servant (Mark 9:35). It is also the term that came to identify an office in the early church: “deacon”. One line of thinking is that Phoebe was not a deacon, but a “deaconess”, which is an entirely different form of office. There may be passages that support differing roles for men and women, but this is not one of them. Greek is not a gender-neutral language; so Paul’s reference to Phoebe as a deaconess is no different that our distinction (one of the few that still exist) between a waiter and a waitress: there is no difference between the two other than gender. Paul may have intended different roles for men and women, but this usage of the “deaconess” does not support such distinctions. Paul was simply constrained by the Greek language.

Greetings

Another issue with the present chapter is the number of personal greetings that were included in a letter to a church that Paul had never visited. Several possible explanations have been presented. To begin with, it is said that Paul may have been trying to establish a relationship with the Roman church by stressing the number of acquaintances that he had in common with the church. Another line of thinking says that these personal acquaintances were not with the Roman church at all, but are explained by the general use of the letter in the early church, and these personal greetings were addressed to individuals in other churches to which the letter was circulated. Evidence to support the idea that Chapter 16 was not an original part of the letter include the fact that several of the early manuscripts do not contain this ending. However, it is possible that this same fact supports the argument in favor of the original validity of this chapter, in that because of the personal nature of the chapter, it was excluded form copies which were circulated among the churches.

While the Jews were largely treated well (at least by comparison) the relationship was never an easy one, and the Jews were more than once expelled from Rome itself. Paul met Priscilla and Aquila in his travels among the gentiles because they had been expelled from Rome (Acts 18:2). Apparently, the husband wife were now returned to Rome, and if so, Paul may have met other Jewish Christians who had once been expelled from Rome but had since returned.

Still another idea is that these were individuals whom Paul had met in his travels among the gentiles, but who had subsequently returned to Rome. As evidenced by the example of Priscilla (Prisca) and Aquila, the relationship between the Jews and the Romans was one of considerable turmoil. The Jews were given special privileges not offered to other peoples dominated by the Roman Empire. For example, they were allowed to keep the Sabbath and this precluded their service in the Roman army. Such service was required of all the other nations under Roman rule.

Whatever the explanation for the origin of the chapter may be, it does not detract from its status as scripture, inspired by God, and profitable for instruction in righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16). Whenever we approach scripture, we put our faith in a process that begins with divine inspiration, extends through the recording and translation, and and continues with our inspired reading of the text. Scholarly examination is no threat to scripture. The power of scripture is only endangered when the people of God refuse to encounter the word of God.

I, Tertius

The personal nature of this closing chapter is extended in a very interesting way by the inclusion of a greeting from Tertius, who “wrote down this letter.” Though Paul was well educated and spoke Greek as primary language (he would have studied Hebrew as a part of his Jewish education) it was his custom, and the method common to his day, to dictate his letter to a scribe. Here, the scribe makes himself known by included his greeting in with the greetings from Paul. By contrast, in Galatians 6:11, we have recorded the intrusion of Paul into the dictation of the scribe.

We do not know who Tertius was or have any further mention of him. Or, perhaps we do. There is some speculation that Paul’s recording secretary was Silas. This possibility is suggested based on the observation the “Tertius” and “Silas” are etymologically related in that “Tertius” is a Greek name derived from the Greek word for “third” and “Silas” is a Hebrew name taken from the Hebrew word for “third”. So it may be that, in the same way Simon was Peter, Saul was Paul, and (perhaps more like) Bartholomew may or may not have been Nathaniel, there is some possibility that Tertius was Silas.

According to My Gospel

Humility, one may observe, was never one of Paul’s best traits, and his ego seems always to be brimming beneath the surface if not presenting itself outright. Here, his assertion of the importance of his gospel and the message which he preached is more than enough to make the more timid of us cringe. But Paul, of course, was never timid; if he were, he would not have been Paul. We do, however, shorten “The Gospel According to John” for example, to simply “The Gospel of John” and we may similarly refer to the same as “John’s Gospel”. This claim by Paul, then, of “his” gospel is appropriately applied to Romans, as it, more than any other Pauline letter, contains a systematic presentation of Paul’s “theology” – his account of the Gospel: the Gospel according to Paul.

I Will Go to Spain

I Will Go to Spain

Romans 15:14-33

Full of Goodness

In verses 14-16 Paul is somewhat apologetic to the Christians in Rome for the way he has spoken to them thus far in the letter, saying that it was only to “remind” them of what they already know. But, even if Paul says they are “full of goodness” the original recipients of the letter may have been, as perhaps we are, uncertain as to Paul’s assessment of the human condition. In the same letter, Paul has described us all as sinners (3:23) on the one hand, and on the other declares that we by our very nature do what is right (2:14-15). Indeed, Paul’s description of himself appears inconsistent. On the one hand he establishes his credentials as not only a mature Christian (14:14, 15:1) but an apostle, a special messenger of Christ (1:1). On the other hand he admits that he himself continually struggled with sin (7:14-20). Further, Paul tells us that all of creation awaits the day when we are united with Christ (8:19-21).

Does Paul believe we are saints or sinners, or is it possible that Paul believed we are both saints and sinners? Though Paul repeatedly speaks very negatively of “the flesh” (7:5, for example) he also speaks very positively of our ability to know and to do what is right and even finds good in Israel’s rejection of their election (10:1-4). But in the end, Paul knows that it not about how good we are. “It does not, therefor, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.” (9:16 NIV)

I Glory in Christ Jesus

It would be easy to find laughable Paul’s continual assertion of his humility. Here, in verses 17-22, he says he can take no credit for the many great things he has down because it is Christ who worked these accomplishments through him. Of course, he might not have mentioned these accomplishments at all. Elsewhere (2 Corinthians 12:7-8) he says that his “thorn in the flesh” kept him from boasting about his great accomplishments. Again, he would sound less like someone proclaiming his humility from the rooftops if he did not mention these accomplishments at all.

Yet, somehow Paul gets away with this very pointed modesty, and there are very valid reasons for this. First, we really do believe Paul when he says here that he gives all the glory to Christ, and in Galatians (Galatians 6:14) where he says that he glories only in the cross of Christ. What does it mean to glory in the Cross of Christ? Jesus identified the cross with self-denial (Matthew 16:24).

Self-denial is the second reason we must accept Paul’s pride in his modesty. His list of hardships (2 Corinthians 11:23-33) is both astounding and humbling. We live in a world of greater opportunity and greater need than Paul could have imagined, but where is the Paul of today, who would give up even a little personal comfort for the sake of others? When Paul here quotes from Isaiah 11:10 saying that those who were not told will see, and those who have not heard will understand, it reminds us painfully of his earlier question (10:14-15). How shall they hear without someone preaching to them?

I Will Go to Spain

In the final verses of the chapter (verses 25-33) Paul gives us some clue as to where and when he wrote the letter, reiterates his desire to go to Rome, and tells us also of his future plans. Paul was in the process of gathering an offering from the Gentile churches that he would take back to Jerusalem, where the Christian Church was being persecuted, and where people were in real need. Paul (who was still then called “Saul”) and Barnabas heard of these troubles through a prophet (Acts 11:25-30) and the disciples of the Gentile churches gathered together an offering to send to Jerusalem.

So, Paul had his plans set. He would go to Jerusalem to deliver the offering, then pass through Rome on his way to Spain. We could ask ourselves what would draw Paul into Spain, but he has already answered this question for us. He has, at the time of his writing to the Romans, already evangelized the Roman territories, and Spain was the new frontier. We have the hindsight of history and know that Spain was one of the great powers to follow Rome, and that the Spaniards would become world explorers. If Paul foresaw any of this, it would explain his great interest in going to Spain.

But things did not work out as Paul had planned. The offering he took to Jerusalem took him, in a sense, to Rome. It was while Paul was in Jerusalem delivering the alms from the Gentiles that he was attacked by the Jews and taken before Felix (Acts 24:17-27). Paul himself then facilitated his trip to Rome by appealing his case to the Emperor (Acts 25:9-12).

So Paul made it to Rome, but not as he had planned. So far as we know, he never made it to Spain. We do not know with any degree of certainty what Paul’s eventual fate became. In 2 Timothy, we hear the words of a man imprisoned and deserted by everyone save Luke. Luke himself ends the Book of Acts without resolving Paul’s fate but merely stating that Paul was imprisoned for some time and continued to preach while under guard.

We do not know exactly how Paul felt about his fate. He is, after all, the one who exhorts us to give thanks in all things (Ephesians 5:19-20). In Romans, Paul assures as that whatever may happen, God always has a plan of redemption.

In his heart a man plans his course, but the Lord directs his steps.

(Proverbs 16:9 NIV)

The God of Endurance and Encouragement

The God of Endurance and Encouragement

Romans 15:1-13

The Weak and the Strong

In the previous chapter, when Paul speaks explicitly of those who are “weak” and, by inference, those who are strong. The word Paul uses in in that setting is astheneo, which is used in Gospels to mean those who are physically weak because of illness. In Chapter 15, Paul refers explicitly to both the weak and the strong. The word Paul uses for the strong is dunatos, which means “powerful” or “capable”. The word translated here as “weak” is a different from the previous chapter. It is adunatos, the opposite of dunatos.

The terms “weak” and “strong” or “ineffective” and “effective” are ordinarily applied judgmentally. In our society, there are few terms that are more pejorative than “weak”. A person can be a lier and a thief, deceptive and corrupt, and a host of other negative traits, but still be effective and capable. In fact, it certainly seems that these characteristics actually enhance ones ability to get ahead. But whatever positive qualities one might have: honesty, fairness, consideration, intelligence, or faithfulness, none of these qualities will excuse event the slightest sign weakness. In “the survival of the fittest”, the fit are always understood to be the strong. Nice guys finish last.

Given this perspective, in order to understand these chapters, we must ask ourselves two questions. To begin with, we must ask ourselves how Paul can count himself among the strong, when he himself admits his weakness. Here in Romans, for example, Paul reveals his own inner struggle between what he knows he should do and what he actually does (7:15). In addition, Paul is well known for his “thorn in the flesh” which Paul somewhat comically describes as preventing him from claiming the greatness he deserves (2 Corinthians 12:7).

The second question we must ask ourselves is how Paul, in the very context of forbidding judgment (14:4) and encouraging unity (15:6) can apply such judgmental and divisive terms. To this point, Paul has consistently united us all in sin (3:9; 3:23) in salvation (1:16) in the Lordship of God (10:12) in judgment (14:10) in grace (3:22; 5:18; 11:32). How can Paul describe us all as equal members of the body of Christ (12:3-5) but at the same time divide us into these superior and inferior categories?

As Christ Has Welcomed You

In our society, we do not like paradox. Though few of us are scientists, we believe in the scientific method. Though we actually understand very little of the world around us, we like to believe that the world is understandable. Understanding the world is not important in itself, but we believe that what we can understand we can control. If there is a common tenet of Western society, it is that we are masters of our own destiny. We can be what we want to be – achieve what we want to achieve. Even the most underprivileged child can overcome adversity and become president (but why would anyone want to?).

Of course, this cannot be true. To begin with, it is simply impossible for everyone to become president. But more than that, poverty and oppression are real adversaries which are not so easily overcome. But we persist in this believe for two reasons. First, it allows us to believe that we can control our lives. This is the same sort of idolatry that the Lord spoke of through Jeremiah. When we trust in society, technology, or the work of our own hands, we abandon the living water for our own broken cisterns (Jeremiah 2:12-13) and put our faith in gods that cannot help us (Jeremiah 2:27-28).

Further, this belief in our own accomplishment relieves us of any responsibility for other people. If we are masters of our own destiny, then others are as well. If my brother or sister cannot overcome their poverty or oppression to succeed in the land of opportunity, then it no fault of mine. Paul tells us that in matters of faith, we are beholden to each other. In so saying, he is in keeping with the teaching of our Lord, who tells us that our responsibility extends to every aspect of the lives of those around us (Matthew 25:31-45).

The God of Endurance and Encouragement

Though you and I may be troubled by paradox, it is a part of the nature of our God, exemplified in his Christ. Paul was well aware of the mystery of the will of God, which he relayed in Ephesians (1:3-10) and in Philippians (2:5-11). Here, he calls God “The God of endurance and encouragement,” a brief reminder of his earlier reference to power of God revealed in the patience of God (9:22-26). This idea may seem counterintuitive: in our world, the strong have no need to be patient – it is one of the advantages of being strong. But with Christ there is the paradox of strength is revealed in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9).

What can explain the greatest being humbled and the strongest becoming weak? As recorded in John, Jesus says that it is because of the love of God for the entire world – love which calls us into unity with God and with each other (John 17:22-23). It is in this same call to unity that Paul calls us to treat each other with respect. If God can be humbled for our sake, can we not make ourselves humble for the sake of others?

And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.

(Matthew 10:38-39 ESV)

A Matter of Righteousness

A Matter of Righteousness

Romans 14:13-23

Therefore

Context is always important in Bible study, and Paul himself indicates the importance of context in this passage by prefacing the passage with the Greek oun, translated “therefore”. Paul in Romans uses this word many times in both the positive (5:1) and the negative (6:1). In this way, Paul indicates that the argument of this passage is not only connected with the previous statement that each of us must give an account of himself before God (14:12) but with the entire argument of the letter that salvation is an act of God that is not dependent on our actions (9:18) but that our encounter with this grace of God requires in us a response which will shape the way we live (8:12-13).

In addition to this larger context, we must also consider the more immediate context of the passage, which ostensibly is a discussion of dietary restrictions. It is in this context that the NIV translates the Greek oudeis in verse 14 as “no food” instead of the word “nothing” which it mentions in a footnote. Elsewhere in the New Testament, this word is either translated as “nothing” (as in Luke 12:2) or “no one” (as in John 14:6). However, while the argument Paul presents uses the occasion of dietary restrictions, it is in fact a discussion of our freedom (presented in the first half of the chapter) and responsibility (presented in this passage) as Christians. The idea of freedom in Christ must have been new to those to whom Paul wrote, the majority of whom had either been Greek slaves or slaves to the Jewish law, but to us the idea of the hand-in-hand connection of freedom and responsibility is common knowledge, if not common practice.

Judgment

We must also consider in context Paul’s assertion that we may not judge each other (verse 13). This is a very hard saying, first because we are so accustomed and inclined to considering our own accomplishments in relation to those of others (Luke 18:10-14) but also because it is hard to understand in light of our responsibility to judge for ourselves between right and wrong (Matthew 7:17-20). There are two interpretations which would restrict the admonition against judgment in ways that would make it more understandable (or perhaps more tolerable).

The first is to place this admonition in the context of 14:1, which constrains the caution to the scope of those issues which constitute “disputable matters”. In this line of thought, there are matters about which the Bible contains clear teaching about which there can be no dispute. Paul is a source of such teachings, and provides us a list of unarguably sinful acts in the first chapter of Romans (1:28-32). The more common citation, however, comes from Galatians (5:16-26).

The second interpretation which provides a restricted understanding of this prohibition is to place it entirely within the bounds of the church (Matthew 18:15-17; but see also 1 Corinthians 5:12-13). In this interpretation, we are enjoined from judgment against other Christians, but free to judge those who are unbelievers. If we combine this with the previous interpretation, then we may judge for ourselves who is and who is not Christian, because we know which matters are indisputable, and then may judge those we do not deem to be acceptable to Christ.

One must wonder whether Paul would be amused or exasperated by those who would take his teachings as law. Paul’s continual assertion in Romans and in other writings is that there is no legal definition of salvation. “God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy.” (9:15a) To use the words of Paul as the definitive basis by which may judge others is groundless. To use any means to decide for ourselves who God should condemn is an affront to the grace of God (2:1-4).

A Matter of Righteousness

“Hate the sin; love the sinner” is a common sentiment, but the only commandment to hate Christ gave us is the commandment to hate our own sinful selves (John 12:25). Paul tells us that the kingdom of God is not defined by hate, nor is it defined in any way by sin, but by righteousness, peace, and joy. The kingdom is not defined in the negative, by the means of exclusion or punishment, but in the positive, by the means of inclusion and favor. According to Paul, righteousness is not for condemnation, but it is the good news of salvation (1:16-17). “If God is for us, who can be against us?” (8:31b)

This entire discussion, of course, is evocative of the words of Christ, who enjoined us from judgment of others not only because of the consequence of judgment upon ourselves, but because we are simply unfit to judge (Matthew 7:1-5). No one sets out to be a hypocrite. The problem with the plank in my own eye is that I can never see it. It is to our great benefit that judgment belongs only to God, who has entrusted it to Christ (John 5:22), and we know what the judgment of Christ is like.

The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.” (John 8:3-11 ESV)

Whether We Live or Die

Whether We Live or Die

Romans 14:1-12

Whose Faith Is Weak?

Many of the subjects to which are given so much attention in the writings of Paul generally and in the Letter to the Romans in particular seem completely out of date to modern (post-modern?) Christians. In this passage, Paul discusses dietary restrictions and the observance of special holy days. While there remains a minor (in terms of the size of the population involved) dispute over the observance of the Sabbath, the idea of a religious dispute over dietary matters may seem strange to us.

Coming from our modern standpoint to an understanding of this dispute, we might begin by understanding what it is not. To begin with, though we might reasonably expect that the church or churches to which Paul wrote in Rome to have been comprised largely of Gentiles, it appears to be the case that there were a large numbers of Jewish Christians in the church, as well. Historically, we know that there were perhaps as many Jews in Rome at the time as there were in Palestine. There are also indications from the letter itself that it was addressed to a congregation that at least included a number of Jews, if it was not predominately Jewish. The lengthy discourses on the children of Abraham, the role of the law, and the eventual redemption of the nation of Israel all suggest this conclusion.

We might reasonably expect, then, that a dispute over dietary standards might have arisen between the Jews, whose dietary restrictions constituted fully a third of the Law, and who therefore viewed dietary matters to be matters of morality, and the Gentiles, whose dietary practices must have seemed to the Jews not only lax, but scandalous. This, however, does not characterize the dispute to which Paul refers. Instead, Paul refers to a dispute between those who eat meat and those who are strictly vegetarian. It is not clear how this dispute arose – whether it originated with those who, like most modern vegetarians, limit their diet to vegetables out of concern for the treatment of animals, or arose from the apprehension that any meat that might be available had preciously been sacrificed to idols, and therefore was not fit for Christian consumption (1 Corinthians 8:7).

In carefully considering these instructions from Paul, we must not only recognize that it does not concern a dispute between the Jews and the Gentiles, we must also understand that Paul’s instructions do not merely regard questions of diet and days. When Peter received his vision in which the sheet came down before him laden with all manner of unclean things (Acts 10:11-20) the importance of the vision was not the relaxation of dietary standards, but inclusion into the family of faith those that had previously been seen as unclean.

In these verses, we must also understand that the matter at hand is not simply diet. Though Paul has largely moved from theological argument to practical application, he has not abandoned the rhetoric that has brought him to this point. Paul has already explained that it is not important that we are biological children of Abraham, but that we have the faith of Abraham (9:8). It is not the circumcision of the flesh that matters, but the circumcision of the heart (2:28-29). It is not the letter of the law that matters, but the spirit of the law (7:6). It is not the symbolic death of baptism that frees us from condemnation, but the death of self and sin (6:1-4). In the same way, though Paul does not use the words of Christ, his argument is that it is not what goes into our mouths that defiles us, but what comes out of our mouths (Matthew 15:11).

We might further consider those to whom Paul refers as “weak in the faith.” The term Paul uses here is astheneo. In the Gospels, this word is used to describe those who were sick and were brought to Jesus to be healed (for example, Mark 6:56). In the letters of Paul and the Letter to the Hebrews, it is translated “weak”. Again, there are various possible interpretations of this term, and we do well first to consider what Paul does not mean.

We might take the terms “strong” and “weak” to mean those who have greater or lesser faith. This interpretation would be groundless, not only in the context of this passage, but in the larger context of Romans (though the English words “believe” and “trust” are used in 10:9-11, these are translated from the same word that is here translated “faith”) but also in the context of the teachings of Jesus, who taught that even a mustard-seed of faith would move mountains (Matthew 17:15-20). We should, however, consider the characteristics of those whom Paul labeled “weak”. First, they were those who held a position contrary to the position of Paul. Paul was not unlike ourselves in this regard, and we must therefore not underestimate this fact when reading this passage and the similar one in 1 Corinthians. Second, we must notice that, at least in this case, it was those who held the more restrictive position that Paul considered weak, and those who held more open views that Paul considered strong.

We Belong to the Lord

What, then, is Paul saying? If we discount the idea that Paul speaks of the weak in derogatory terms – an idea that we must discount, as Paul only introduces the terms to point out that we must not judge each other; then is he advancing some form of moral relativism, in which we each live by our own moral standards that cannot be judged by or imposed upon the morality of others?

As we have seen so far in our study of Romans, the response that Paul has given to such notions is consistently and forcefully in the negative. To those who would say that we can accomplish good through doing evil, Paul offers no respect (3:5-8). To those who would say that grace is such a good thing that we should sin more so as to experience even more grace, Paul presents the simple truth that our encounter with Christ must transform us as though we had died to our former selves and come alive again in Christ (6:1-7). To those who would ask how a God who gave us choice could blame us for our choices, Paul presents a God who has consistently and lovingly reached out to those who reject him (9:19-24). To all those who would say that the judgment of God is so severe that there is nothing we can do, and to those who would say that the love of God is so great that there is nothing we must do, Paul presents the judgment of God indivisible from the love of God (11:22).

We cannot judge each other, Paul says, because we belong to the Lord not to each other, and judgment belongs to God, not to ourselves. Paul has already presented us a picture of that judgment – a judgment in which God is seeking to redeem and not to condemn (8:31-39). For some of us, this forgiveness is wonderful when applied to ourselves, but exasperating when applied to others. In this way we find ourselves kindred spirits of Jonah, who was sick to death of the love of God (Jonah 4:1-4).

Whether We Live or Die

The NIV begins this passage with the term “disputable matters”. It would be convenient to believe that these were simple matters like eating meat or vegetables, whether we wear a tie or a T-shirt, or what sort of music is necessary for worship. These issues, we might magnanimously say, are disputable. At the same time we hold as indisputable those matters about which there is the most dispute.

Does Paul say that our belief on such issues does not matter? In fact, one can get the idea from reading these later chapters that we simply do not matter very much. In social settings, we must always put others, even our enemies, above ourselves (12:14-19). In political settings, we must always submit to authorities, even those who seem bent on harming us, because they are agents of God (13:1-2). Even in religious settings, we cannot demand consideration, but must be considerate of others. In fact, in these verses Paul claims that it does not matter whether we live or die.

I do not know about you, but it certainly matters to me. Paul makes it very clear that what we do and and what we believe matters to God. Though it often escaped our attention, we do not have to try very hard to notice that what is important to God is not what is important to us. God has different values than we have.

Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.”

Then Jesus said to the disciples, “If any one would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever loses his life for me will find it. What good will it be if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul?” (Matthew 16:23-25a)

The process of “sanctification” (6:22 RSV) which “leads to holiness” (6:22 NIV) is the process of losing this world and gaining our souls.

Understanding the Present Time

Understanding the Present Time

Romans Chapter 13

Submit to the Authorities

The major theme of The Letter to the Romans is salvation by grace. Paul makes it abundantly clear that there is nothing we can do to attain salvation. But, in response to those who would argue that it therefore does not matter what we do (3:8, 6:1) Paul’s response is emphatic (3:8, 6:2). In earlier chapters, Paul has presented careful theological argument. In these later chapters, Paul offers practical instruction and exhortation for our daily response to grace. Chapter 13 continues in this theme of practical instruction. Though it contains some of the plainest language in all of Romans, it includes one of those passages that is difficult for us to understand because we cannot believe that it means what it very obviously says.

In verses 1-7, Paul explicitly instructs us to respect earthly authorities and submit ourselves to them. We should do this not only out of fear of retribution (verse 4) but because it is the right thing to do (verse 5) because these authorities are established by God (verse 1). The assurance that earthly authorities offer no “terror” to those who do what is right (verse 3) seems particularly hard to understand in our present time.

There are various ways of interpreting this passage. One is to understand the passage as describing the best case scenario in which earthly are willing agents of God and therefore do not give godly citizens any cause to fear. If we accept this interpretation, then it follows that this instruction does not apply to those authorities that are not actively seeking the will of God. We could then conclude that authorities which are manifestly antagonist to God require our disrespect and open opposition. We might support this interpretation with the response of Peter and John to the Jewish rulers who would have restrained Peter and John from spreading the Gospel (Acts 4:18-19). In this case, however, Peter and John were interacting with authorities who did claim divine authority, but were not acting in a godly manner.

In contrast to supporting civil insurrection, Peter instructs us (1 Peter 2:13-18) to submit to every earthly authority – even going so far as to instruct slaves to submit to their masters. Also, we must consider Paul’s audience. Paul was addressing Christians in Rome, where the authorities were in open apposition to the authority of God. In Romans, Paul acknowledges the persecution suffered by Christians (8:18) and elsewhere recounts the various difficulties he himself had suffered at the hands of the authorities (2 Corinthians 11:24-25). Can it be that the Bible endorses the horrific acts of corrupt government, even to the point of supporting the abominable institution of slavery?

The question is, of course, rhetorical. We know from our understanding of a powerful and loving God that this cannot be the case. How, then, can we understand this passage from Paul and the similar passage from Peter? First, we must acknowledge that the perfect will of God is in no way imperiled by the imperfection of this world. Paul has already stated that the plan of God to offer salvation to the Gentiles was accomplished through Israel’s rejection of that same salvation (9:6-8; 11:11-16). The first step in accepting this instruction, then, is to acknowledge that earthly authorities can be agents of God, even though they are unaware of or are in open opposition to that will.

The other idea that is essential to understanding this passage is one that is in direct confrontation to our Western world view. Though if pressed we will admit that “life is not fair” and “there is no justice in this world” this is not the view that motivates our daily lives. Instead, we expect to be treated fairly, and when we are not we expect just recompense. This is clearly not the view advanced by Peter and Paul. While we can expect persecution, even when we abide by the law of this world, we cannot demand worldly justice, but must accept our situation without complaint. This, after all, is the justice of God, who demonstrated justice through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the very person of God. This is the pattern of the justice of God; it is not demanded as recompense, but offered as a gift.

Fulfillment of the Law

In verses 8-10, Paul uses a very typical device as he turns a metaphor “on its ear” and in so doing seems to take the discussion to an entirely different train of thought. Here, Paul uses his admonition against indebtedness as a launching point for a discussion of the debt of love. In complete agreement with Jesus (Matthew 22:36-40) Paul offers “love your neighbor” as the one requirement which, if met, would satisfy the whole of the law.

In light of the considerable attention Paul has paid to discrediting the law, we might well ask ourselves how he can now suggest that the law has any authority. We must always consider in the proper context those passages which discuss the failure of the law. It is always Paul’s intent when discussing the law to present it as having no application to salvation, which is a gift of grace, but having definite application to our response to grace. Though we have no power to affect our own salvation, salvation has an affect on us.

Though Paul’s transition to the subject of love may seem abrupt, it is by no means out of place. The motivation for grace is love (8:39, John 3:16). The justice of God is inseparable from the love of God (8:31-34). Love calls to love. The love of God, who in Christ submitted himself to us, calls us to submit ourselves in love to the world around us (Matthew 5:38-48). We are called to be perfect, and we are not relieved of this call because it is not easy or practical.

Understanding the Present Time

In verses 11-14, Paul encourages us to have an understanding of the present time. Who among us would not appreciate such an understanding? We live in an age where absurdity, indecency, and corruption have reached a level that seems to tear at the fabric of reality. The extent of evil seems too great even to understand, much less to overcome. What can we do in the face of such a great threat? As usual, Paul gives us practical, understandable advice: do what is right. Even in the face of such evil, which we like to think is unique to our present time, God is still God. We know what is right, and we must put away what is evil.

It would be easy to say that Paul, and indeed the whole of the First Century Church, had a quaint but mistaken idea of the timing of the Lord’s return, and that this understanding caused them to live with a sense of urgency which, in the present time, we cannot attain. In view of history, we might believe that we cannot be expected to live with such urgency. After all, Paul lived with the idea that Christ could return any day. Surely that understanding was wrong, and we have no desire to be wrong. If we were to continue in Paul’s belief, we might even commit the grave sin of looking foolish!

If Paul was wrong in his urgent expectancy of the coming of the kingdom, then so was Christ (Matthew 4:17, 25:1-13) who called us to behave as though the kingdom was near, even though we do not and cannot know the time of its coming. This nearness of the kingdom could mean two things. It could mean that we have limited time to put our affairs in order and must therefore act quickly to secure our own salvation. In that sense, it might be viewed as a threat. But a threat is also a promise, of a sort, and the justice of God is both a threat and a promise. This is the kindness and sternness of God (11:22). As surely as the nearness of the kingdom means imminent justice, it also means imminent grace. We must repent, because the kingdom of heaven is near. We may repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.

For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not hidden from thee, neither is it far off. It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say, Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear it, and do it? But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it. See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil;

(Deuteronomy 30:11-15 KJV)