1 PETER 1:17-2:3 REDEEMED BY THE BLOOD OF THE LAMB; LOVE; SPIRITUAL NEWBORNS

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

1 Peter 1:17 If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth; 18 knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, 19 but with precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. 20 For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you 21 who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.

1) “1:17 is interesting. We are not saved by our works, but we will be judged by our works. Bottom line, you must try to live holy and not sin even though you don’t have to be sinless. God’s grace will save you by the blood of Jesus. But at the same time, if you go back into sin, your sins will cause you to fall from grace and lose your eternal life when you die. 2 Peter 2:20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. 21 For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them. 22 It has happened to them according to the true proverb, “A dog returns to its own vomit,” and, “A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire.” Therefore, we need to conduct ourselves in “fear” while on earth. Aren’t we supposed to have full assurance of our salvation and not be fearful of standing before God in judgment? Doesn’t “perfect love cast our fear” (1 John 4:17 By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, we also are in this world. 18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.)” Yet Peter tells them to live in fear while on earth. Bottom line is that we still need to be fearful of losing our salvation while on earth. Paul, the proponent of “salvation by grace through faith, not works”, echoes this fear command: Philippians 2:12 So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who is at work in you, both to desire and to work for His good pleasure.”

2) The motivation for this appeal to be holy is that they were “redeemed (lutroó: To redeem, to ransom, to liberate by paying a ransom price) by the blood of the Lamb”. In the ancient Greco-Roman world, the concept of redemption was well understood in the context of slavery and captivity. A person could be freed from slavery or imprisonment if a ransom was paid. The ransom price to free us from the slavery of sin was the blood of Jesus, i.e. his death on the cross. Some of the early church fathers thought that God paid this ransom price to Satan, but that is not true. God paid the ransom price to Himself to satisfy his wrath against our sin so that he could justify us. That appeasing of God’s wrath is called propitiation. This plan to redeem us by the blood of Jesus was “foreknown” by God before he even started the creation week in Genesis 1. How is that? He knew he was going to create humns with free will and that they, given the choice of the tree of life and the tree of knowledge of good and evil, would chose to sin, and then everyone born after the fall would make the same choice to sin. Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all mankind, because all sinned.” So God is thinking, “I love all people and want them to have a way to be saved from my just wrath; how can I do that”? Maybe he could let us try to save ourselves by good works, or even by buying our salvation with “gold or silver”? No that would not satisfy God’s wrath. The only thing that would satisfy HIs wrath against our sins was to let His Son become flesh and die for us. I don’t understand why that was the only thing that could do that, but it was. So Jesus appeared the first time in his incarnation (God becoming flesh, John 1:14 and the word became flesh and dwelt among us) and God proved that he would redeem us by the blood of Jesus by raising Jesus from the dead.

3) 1 Peter 1:22 Since you have purified your souls in obedience to the truth for a sincere love of the brothers and sisters, fervently love one another from the heart, 23 for you have been born again not of seed which is perishable, but imperishable, that is, through the living and enduring word of God. 24 For, “All flesh is like grass, And all its glory is like the flower of grass. The grass withers, And the flower falls off, 25 But the word of the Lord endures forever.” And this is the word which was preached to you.” Peter now switches from “obedience” verses to “love” verses for the first time. We purify (hagnizó: To purify, to cleanse, to sanctify) ourselves by obedience, by no conforming to our former lusts, by living a set apart life. But is that all there is to the Christian life, just stay away from sin? No. God wants us to purify ourselves so that we can love one another: a sincere, fervent love from the heart. Replace the “lusts” with “love”. The whole spirit of Christianity is “love”. The motivation is that we have been “born again” of the imperishable seed of the word of God that endures forever. We have a new self that is filled with love for one another b/c God loved us and gave His Son to save us. I know that has been the biggest challenge in my Christian walk. I was raised where the emphasis seemed to be getting all the right doctrines even though I’m sure that love was preached and shown by a lot of church members. My parents never said “I love you” until they were in their 70’s and I was in my 40’s, although I know they loved me. They were raised on the farm in the depression and WWII, working hard all their lives. Expressing emotion was not something they were raised in and they didn’t show it in my life. Maybe in my last days I can work on that!

4) 1 Peter 2:1 Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander, 2 and like newborn babies, long for the pure milk of the word, so that by it you may grow in respect to salvation, 3 if you have tasted the kindness of the Lord.” “Therefore (based on what went on before), i.e. you were born again (1:23) so you are “newborns” spiritually. Newborns feed on milk and spiritual newborns feed on the milk of the word of God, i.e. the basics of obedience and love. The Hebrew writer talks about the “meat” of the word as he discusses the priesthood of Melchizadek and the change of the Law in Hebrews 5:11 About this we have much to say, and it is hard to explain, since you have become dull of hearing. 12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of the oracles of God. You need milk, not solid food, 13 for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. 14 But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.” So God doesn’t want us to keeping eating milk but that is where we all start as spiritual newborns. But first you must put away the bad stuff in your heart and mind. The motivation for all this: “if you have tasted the kindness of the Lord”.

1 PETER 1:10-16 What did the prophets understand about their Messianic predictions; be ye holy as God is holy

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

The theme of 1 Peter is the suffering of the diaspora Jewish Christians. Read the background for this letter in the first article: 1 Peter Suffering (1). There are 4 fairly lengthy section on this suffering and how to endure it: thus 4 articles Suffering 1,2,3,4. But what about the other comments by Paul mixed in with these sections on suffering?

  1. 1 Peter 1:10 As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and inquiries, 11 seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow. 12 It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven—things into which angels long to look.” What salvation? He had just told them that after a little while of suffering that they would receive glory and salvation at the revelation of Jesus (His 2nd coming). Therefore they should rejoice even in their suffering. 1:10 comments on that salvation. The prophets in the OT did prophesy of the gracious salvation that the Messiah would bring, of his sufferings and his glorious resurrection. For example, Isaiah 53: But He was pierced for our offenses, He was crushed for our wrongdoings; The punishment for our well-being was laid upon Him, And by His wounds we are healed. He was oppressed and afflicted,
    Yet He did not open His mouth; Like a lamb that is led to slaughter, And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers, But the Lord desiredTo crush Him, causing Him grief if He renders himself as a guilt offering, He will prolong His days, And the good pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand. 11 As a result of the anguish of His soul, He will see it and be satisfied;By His knowledge the Righteous One, My Servant, will justify the many, For He will bear their wrongdoings. 12 Therefore, I will allot Him a portion with the great, And He will divide the plunder with the strong, Because He poured out His life unto death, And was counted with wrongdoers; Yet He Himself bore the sin of many, And interceded for the wrongdoers.” This Messianic prediction has the suffering, death, resurrection, and glory of the Messiah to come 700 years after Isaiah wrote this. The Dead Sea Scrolls confirms that this was written at least 150 years before Jesus was born. A complete copy of Isaiah, the Great Isaiah Scroll, has Isaiah 53 almost verbatim with our earliest Hebrew copy of Isaiah which was 1000 AD. That showed that the prediction in Isaiah 53 were not put in there “after the fact” and that the book was copied accurately through the centuries since the original. But did Isaiah understand his predictions? No. Did Micah understand his prediction that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2)? No. Did David understand his prediction of Jesus’ resurrection in Psalm 16:For You will not abandon my soul to Sheol; You will not allow Your Holy One to undergo decay”? No. No doubt these prophets did “careful searches and inquiries” into what the Holy Spirit had inspired them to write. Maybe they meditated on previous scripture. Maybe they asked the Spirit to explain their predictions to them. But they were never told what the “person or time” in which their predictions would be fulfilled. All that was “revealed to them” was that the fulfillment was not for their time or benefit but for the distant future generations. Peter tells the diaspora that they were able to. understand and benefit from the fulfillment of all the Messianic prophecies via the preaching of the gospel (the good news of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus which by grace through faith they were saved). What a great privilege! Even the angels never understood God’s plan. Would you rather live in Isaiah’s time period? I don’t think so. We live 2,000 years after God’s plan was completely revealed in the NT in the first century AD. We are even more privileged than the first century diaspora. We have all the letters of the NT explaining this gospel salvation. They were looking for glory and immortality to be given them after a “little while” at the 2nd coming in 70 AD. We have that immortality and assurance that we will live eternally after we die.
  2. 1 Peter 1:13 Therefore, prepare your minds for action, keep sober in spirit, set your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. 14 As obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance, 15 but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behavior; 16 because it is written: “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” “Therefore” (based on what went before) Peter tells them how they should live so as not to lose that future salvation. So they were expecting to receive this salvation and immortality at the “revelation of Jesus” (His 2nd coming). Paul said that the believers, some of whom would still be alive at the resurrection, would receive immortality at the resurrection at the end of the Jewish Age in 70 AD (1 Corinthians 15). That glory was “about to be” revealed to them: 5:1 Elders who [are] among you, I exhort, who [am] a fellow-elder, and a witness of the sufferings of the Christ, and of the glory about to be (mello which always means about to happen) revealed.” In 70 AD God would show to the world who the true sons of God were, i.e. the Jewish Christians and not the unbelieving Jews who were rebelling against Rome and would be killed (a million died) in the siege and destruction of the city and the temple. Paul also spoke of this glory “about to be revealed” in Romans 8:18 For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time [are] not worthy [to be compared] with the glory about to be (mello)revealed in us”. As Gentiles Christians living 2,000 years later, it is hard to understand what 70 AD meant to the Jewish Christians who had been persecuted by their Jewish non believers during the transition period from 30-70 AD. It gave them relief from their persecution from the Jews (1 Thessalonians 1) and showed the world that they were the true children of God. But, they would need to be faithful in order to receive that glory and immortality. They would need to not be conformed (suschématizó: To conform, to fashion oneself according to: from which we get a “schematic”: a drawing or plan that shows the details of how something operates or is put together) to their former lusts which could cause them to fall from grace and lose their future salvation.” The goal: Be ye holy (hagios: Holy, sacred, set apart) as He (God) is holy. God makes us “set apart”, cleansed, “sanctified” (“Hagiazō”: is a verb that signifies the act of making something holy or sacred. It’s derived from the Greek word “hagios” (ἁγιος), which means “holy”. It signifies the process of setting something or someone apart for God’s special use or purpose.” But we are not special if we conform ourselves to the lusts of sinners all around us. Instead, Romans 12:1 I call upon you, therefore, brethren, through the compassions of God, to present your bodies a sacrifice — living, sanctified, acceptable to God — your intelligent service; 2 and be not conformed (suschématizó: To conform, to fashion oneself according to) to this age, but be transformed (metamorphoó: To transform, to change form: the word we get “metamorphosis”: Metamorphosis is a biological process that involves a significant change in an organism’s form, structure, or substance during development. It can occur in many animals, including insects, amphibians, fish, mollusks, and crustaceans) by the renewing of your mind, for your proving what [is] the will of God — the good, and acceptable, and perfect.” In other words we go from ugly cocoons to beautiful butterflies. Not by our own good works, but by the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. He cleanses us from sin and will keep us clean by the blood of Jesus. So try to keep that new cleansed self as clean from sin as you can. You don’t have to be perfect and sinless, but you should try. The grace of God will take care of the rest. 1 John 1:7 and if in the light we may walk, as He is in the light — we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son doth cleanse us from every sin.” From AI: “Helping us to live for God is what the Spirit’s “sanctifying work” is all about. As Peter indicates, our participation in this can be described mainly as obedience. Sanctification is the moment-by-moment process by which we more and more submit our hearts, minds, and bodies to following Jesus.” 1 Thessalonians 5:23
    Now may the God of peace himself sanctify you completely, and may your whole spirit and soul and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 1 Corinthians 6:11
    And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” Paul quotes from Leviticus “be ye holy for I am holy”. “Be ye holy for I am holy” is a central theme in the Book of Leviticus, specifically found in Leviticus 11:44-45 and 19:2, where God commands the Israelites to be holy, reflecting His own holiness. This signifies a call to live a life dedicated to God, reflecting His purity, righteousness, and separation from the world. The Israelites had just come out of pagan Egypt and God was calling them to be different from the Egyptians and their idolatry and sins. Am I any different from the non Christians around me? Am I still consumed by the lust of the eye, the lust of the flesh, and the pride of life? Would a non Christian look at me and see that I am a special cleansed sinner?

I PETER 4:12-19 SUFFERING (4)

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

As you can tell by now, the suffering of the diaspora Jewish Christians is the theme of 1 Peter. This is the 4th section on suffering in the letter. Refer back to the 3rd article, “suffering (3)” to see how they were being slandered and suffering.

1 Peter 4:12 Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal among you, which comes upon you for your testing, as though something strange were happening to you; 13 but to the degree that you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing, so that at the revelation of His glory you may also rejoice and be overjoyed. 14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory, and of God, rests upon you. 15 Make sure that none of you suffers as a murderer, or thief, or evildoer, or a troublesome meddler; 16 but if anyone suffers as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but is to glorify God in this name. 17 For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God? 18 And if it is with difficulty that the righteous is saved, what will become of the godless man and the sinner? 19 Therefore, those also who suffer according to the will of God are to entrust their souls to a faithful Creator in doing what is right.

A few key points in this section:

1) Don’t be surprised if you suffer for being a Christian. Paul said in 2 Timothy 3:12 Indeed, all who want to live in a godly way in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.” Rejoice that you can share the sufferings of Christ, the same suffering that he endured. At the revelation of His glory (the 2nd coming in 70 AD), they could rejoice. That glory was “about to be revealed”: 1 Peter 5:1 Elders who [are] among you, I exhort, who [am] a fellow-elder, and a witness of the sufferings of the Christ, and of the glory about to be (mello which in the NT always means about to happen) revealed…” 4 and at the manifestation of the chief Shepherd (the 2nd coming), ye shall receive the unfading crown of glory.” 2 Thessalonians 1:9 These people will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified among His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed”. Jesus was glorified at His 2nd coming and the Jewish Christians were glorified as the true sons of God and not the unbelieving Jews who were killed by the Romans in 70 AD. Paul said in Romans 8:18 For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time [are] not worthy [to be compared] with the glory about to be revealed in us.” Again, this glorification of Jesus and of the sons of God was “about to happen” and that could only be 70 AD.

2) Peter repeats a warning from 1 Peter 2:20 in 1 Peter 4:15 Make sure that none of you suffers as a murderer, or thief, or evildoer, or a troublesome meddler”. But if you “suffer as a Christian”, don’t be ashamed but glorify God instead. “if you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are “blessed”. Matthew 5:10 “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in this same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”

3) Paul goes on to say that “it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God, and it begins with us first” (4:17). That would have to be the judgment on the Jews in 70 AD. By 70 AD Jesus had sent the apostles to preach the gospel to the entire Roman Empire, to the Jews first and then the Gentiles. The Jews had the first opportunity to accept Jesus as the Messiah and be saved, but only a small remnant did. The rest of unbelieving Jews persecuted and killed the believing Jews (as Saul, later Paul, did) right up till 70 AD. But did all the Jews hear the gospel and have that opportunity? Romans 10:18 But I say, surely they have never heard, have they? On the contrary: “Their voice has gone out into all the earth, And their words to the ends of the world.” So from 67-70 AD the judgment began on the wicked Jews as the Romans put down the Jewish revolt, sieged Jerusalem in 70 AD and finally broke through the walls to kill 1 million Jews and destroy the city and the temple. 2 Timothy 4:1 I do fully testify, then, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is (mello, always means about to happen) living and dead at his manifestation and his reign”. 1 Peter 4:5 but they will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. 6 For the gospel has for this purpose been preached even to those who are dead, that though they are judged in the flesh as people, they may live in the spirit according to the will of God.” Apparently the “dead” to be judged are those dead spiritually. Or it could be those OT dead in Hades that were judged in 70 AD as predicted in Daniel 12:1-2. Then Peter makes a. puzzling statement: 1 Peter 4:18 And if it is with difficulty that the righteous is saved.” Is it hard to be saved? I thought the Bible teaches that it is simple, just believe in Jesus. So what does Peter mean? (AI) “In 1 Peter 4:18, Peter uses the phrase “if the righteous is scarcely saved” (or “with difficulty saved”) to highlight the challenging nature of the Christian life and the struggles faced by believers even though they are righteous in God’s eyes. He emphasizes that if the righteous face difficulties, those who are ungodly or unrighteous will face even greater consequences. Meaning: A contrast with the ungodly: By highlighting the difficulties faced by the righteous, Peter emphasizes the greater consequences that await those who reject God and live ungodly lives. This serves as a warning and a call to consider the path of righteousness. The righteous face trials and difficulties: Peter isn’t saying that salvation is hard to obtain, but rather that the path of righteousness often involves hardship, persecution, and suffering. This is because believers are called to live differently from the world and may face opposition for their faith.”  So just trust your souls to a faithful Creator who will do what is right, i.e. he will reward the righteous and punish the unrighteous. 1 Peter 5:4 And when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the unfading crown of glory.”

4) 1 Peter 5:6 Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, so that He may exalt you at the proper time, 7 having cast all your anxiety on Him, because He cares about you. 8 Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. 9 So resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same experiences of suffering are being accomplished by your brothers and sisters who are in the world. (it always helps to know that others are suffering just as you are) 10 After you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen, and establish you. 11 To Him be dominion forever and ever. Amen.” This echoes 1 Peter 1:6 In this you greatly rejoice, even though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been distressed by various trials.” Peter sees their trials as suffering for “a little while”. Since the 2nd coming is mentioned in the letter, we can refer to 2 Thessalonians 1:5 This is a plain indication of God’s righteous judgment so that you will be considered worthy of the kingdom of God, for which you indeed are suffering. 6 For after all it is only right for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted, along with us, when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, dealing out retribution to those who do not know God, and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 These people will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified among His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed—because our testimony to you was believed.” This 2nd coming or revelation of Jesus from heaven would be within the lifetime of those Thessalonian Christians as shown in 2 Thessalonians 2. That 2nd coming would kill 1 million evil, wicked Jews as the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the temple in 70 AD. That would certainly give relief to the Jewish Christians who were being persecuted by their Jewish non believing countrymen. If 1 Peter was written between 62 and 64 AD, then it would be “a little while” (i.e. just a few years) before Jesus would send the Romans to punish the evil unbelieving Jews in 70 AD.

1 PETER 3:8-22 SUFFERING (3)

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

1 Peter 3:8 To sum up, all of you be harmonious, sympathetic, Loving, compassionate, and humble; 9 not returning evil for evil or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead; for you were called for the very purpose that you would inherit a blessing. 10 For,

“The one who desires life, to love and see good days,
Must keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking deceit.
11 He must turn away from evil and do good;
He must seek peace and pursue it.
12 For the eyes of the Lord are toward the righteous,
And His ears attend to their prayer,
But the face of the Lord is against evildoers.”

13 And who is there to harm you if you prove zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be in dread, 15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, but with gentleness and respect; 16 and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who disparage your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame. 17 For it is better, if God should will it so, that you suffer for doing what is right rather than for doing what is wrong. 18 For Christ also suffered for sins once for all time, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which He also went and made proclamation to the spirits in prison, 20 who once were disobedient when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you—not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him.”

The theme of 1 Peter is the suffering of the diaspora Jewish Christians. This 3rd article is from the 3rd main section of suffering in the letter. Several key points:

1) As already stated in 1 Peter 2, don’t retaliate when you suffer, “insult for insult”. Most of the time you will be treated respectfully by non-believers if you are a loving, peaceful, compassionate Christian. “But even if you do suffer” for the sake of righteousness (not for something wrong you have done), you are blessed. Mainly, you will find favor with God. You will grow closer to Jesus as you experience the same sufferings that he did. You will develop proven chacter and focus your hope on eternal life not the things of this life. James 1:12 Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial because, having stood the test, that person will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him. 3 knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. 4 And let endurance have its perfect result, so that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing.” Romans 5:Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we also have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we celebrate in hope of the glory of God. 3 And not only this, but we also celebrate in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; 4 and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope; 5 and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.” Suffering completes or perfects our faith just as Jesus’ sufferings completed his faith. Hebrews 2:10 In bringing many sons and daughters to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through what he suffered.” Matthew 5:10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. 11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.”

2) How should you react when slandered for your Christian faith? Peter spoke of this “slander” in 1 Peter 2:12 Keep your behavior excellent among the Gentiles, so that in the thing in which they slander you as evildoers, they may because of your good deeds, as they observe them, glorify God on the day of visitation.” Also in 1 Peter 4:3 For the time already past is sufficient for you to have carried out the desire of the Gentiles, having pursued a course of indecent behavior, lusts, drunkenness, carousing, drinking parties, and wanton idolatries. 4 In all this, they are surprised that you do not run with them in the same excesses of debauchery, and they slander you; 5 but they will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead.” How were the early diaspora Christians “slandered” as “evildoers” by the Gentiles (we know why the Jewish non believers accused the Jewish Christians of blasphemy)? For example, (AI) “Christians were not necessarily culpable for the fire of AD 64 in Rome, according to Tacitus, but they were viewed with high suspicion as a group with ‘degraded and shameful practices’, holding to ‘a foreign and deadly superstition’; certainly they evidenced ‘antisocial tendencies’.” (AI) “The state and other members of civic society punished Christians for treason, various rumored crimes, illegal assembly, and for introducing an alien cult that led to Roman apostasy. The first, localized Neronian persecution occurred under Emperor Nero ( r. 54–68) in Rome.” (AI) “Two of the most common accusations made against the Christians by their contemporaries were that they practiced incest (because they referred to each other as “brother” and “sister”) and cannibalism ( the Eucharist being “the body and blood of Christ”, which could easily be misunderstood).” Those. Gentiles who slandered them would be put to shame on judgment day, the day of “visitation”, but only if you suffer without retaliation.

3) It is better if you suffer for doing right than for doing wrong. Jesus suffered, the just (Jesus) for the unjust (sinners). He did that to “bring us to God”. Hebrews 2:10 For it was fitting for Him, for whom are all things, and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to perfect the originator of their salvation through sufferings.”  He was put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit (raised from the dead) as His reward for his suffering and death. Then Peter goes off on a tangent, discussing how Jesus went in that spirit and preached to the spirits in prison, i.e. the disobedient sinners in the days of Noah. Was that during his 3 days in the tomb that he did that? If so, he went to the Hadean world and preached to them. If so, what did he preach to them? He surely didn’t preach a 2nd chance. Maybe he just told them about his death and what they missed by being disobedient. In contrast, 8 souls were “brought safely through the water”. They were saved, not “from the water” (although that is true also), but saved “through” or “by” the water. Saved from what? They were saved from the sinful environment that was on the earth at that time. Genesis 6:5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of mankind was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually. 6 So the Lord was sorry that He had made mankind on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 Then the Lord said, “I will wipe out mankind whom I have created from the face of the land; mankind, and animals as well, and crawling things, and the birds of the sky. For I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord.” Some say this descent by Jesus into Hades is not the meaning of this passage. They say that this refers to the Spirit of Christ preaching to the people before the flood through Noah. 2 Peter 2:4 For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of darkness, held for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;”

4) Peter then said that baptism “now” saves us just like (“corresponding to that”) he waters saved Noah from the moral corruption on the earth. He adds that baptism is not the removal of dirt from the flesh, which would indicate he is talking about water baptism. Also obviously he is talking about water baptism since he made it a parallel to the waters saving Noah. Again, Noah was not saved from the waters, but was saved by the waters. Baptism is the appeal to God of a good conscience, i.e. a pure conscience that wants to be saved from sin. Baptism is an act of faith, not a work that earns our salvation. Colossians 2:2 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And when you were dead in your wrongdoings and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He made you alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our wrongdoings.” Peter also says that we are baptized through faith in the resurrection of Jesus, i.e. the same power that raised Jesus raises us from the dead spiritually when we are baptized and forgiven. “Baptism now saves you”. Peter told them in Acts 2:37 Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what are we to do?” 38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” This was spoken by the same Peter who wrote 1 Peter 3:21. He said that both repentance and baptism were necessary for the forgiveness of sins. Was Peter now saying that baptism alone without faith and repentance saves you? Of course not. But he is saying that the actual point at which a person is saved by grace through faith is when he/she is baptized. In Acts 22:16 Saul (later called Paul the apostle) is told by Ananias, “arise and be baptized and wash away your sins”. How plain can that be? Even though he saw the resurrected Jesus on the road and had recognized that Jesus really was the Son of God like the Christians he had been killing claimed, he still had his sins or else Ananias could not have told him to be baptized to wash them away. Jesus told his disciples to “preach the gospel to the whole creation: he that believes and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16). Doesn’t that put baptism before one is saved? It is amazing to read the “double talk” trying to say that Peter isn’t really saying that “baptism saves”. For example, from gotquestions.org “As with any single verse or passage, we discern what it teaches by first filtering it through what we know the Bible teaches on the subject at hand. In the case of baptism and salvation, the Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind, including baptism (Ephesians 2:8-9). So, any interpretation which comes to the conclusion that baptism, or any other act, is necessary for salvation, is a faulty interpretation. For more information, please visit our webpage on “Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?” The author is correct that salvation is by grace through faith, not works. But surely this author would concede that confession and repentance are necessary conditions to be saved. Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.” Acts 2:38 repent and be baptized for forgiveness. Do confession and repentance as conditions of saving faith contradict “salvation by grace through faith”? Of course not. Neither does baptism as a condition of saving faith contradict “salvation by grace through faith. It is simply a condition as an act of faith in order to be saved. The author says that we have to “filter through what the Bible teaches on the subject at hand”, but then he doesn’t deal with Acts 2:38; 22:16; Mark 16:15,16. He doesn’t do a good job filtering since he ignores those passages. He goes on to say: “Those who believe that baptism is required for salvation are quick to use 1 Peter 3:21 as a “proof text,” because it states “baptism now saves you.” Was Peter really saying that the act of being baptized is what saves us? If he were, he would be contradicting many other passages of Scripture that clearly show people being saved (as evidenced by their receiving the Holy Spirit) prior to being baptized or without being baptized at all. A good example of someone who was saved before being baptized is Cornelius and his household in Acts 10. We know that they were saved before being baptized because they had received the Holy Spirit, which is the evidence of salvation (Romans 8:9; Ephesians 1:13; 1 John 3:24). The evidence of their salvation was the reason Peter allowed them to be baptized. Countless passages of Scripture clearly teach that salvation comes when one believes in the gospel, at which time he or she is sealed “in Christ with the Holy Spirit of promise” (Ephesians 1:13).” Why does he ignore the passages like Acts 2:38 and 22:16 where a person is not saved until after water baptism? What about Romans 6:3 Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too may walk in newness of life.” Paul is saying that we are raised from immersion in the waters of baptism (the Gk work baptizo means to immerse) to walk in newness of llfe. He is saying that you get the new spiritual life after baptism. And what about his argument about Cornelius? It is true that Cornelius got the gift of the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues before he was baptized. But does that prove that he was saved before he was baptized? No, it doesn’t. It was God’s way of showing the Jewish Christians and Peter that the Gentile could be saved just like the Jews. Acts 10:46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter responded, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.” This is the same Peter who said in Acts 2:38 repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins.” If Cornelius was saved just by speaking in tongues before baptism, why would he need to be baptized at all? Cornelius still needed to be baptized to receive the forgiveness of sins. His receiving the Holy Spirit before baptism was an exception to the rule and order of Acts 2:38 in which one is baptized and then receives the gift of the Holy Spirit. But it is not an exception to the requirement of Acts 2:38 that baptism comes before forgiveness. But even if Cornelius was saved before baptism, is that the normal process of salvation (Acts 2:38;22:16; Mark 16:16) or just a one time exception? But I don’t believe he was saved before baptism. The author concludes, “Baptism is the outward sign of what God has done “by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit” (Titus 3:5).” But if baptism is the “washing of regeneration” in this verse, then we are not regenerated until after baptism. What is “regenerated”? “In Titus 3:5, the Greek word for “regeneration” is “palingenesia” (παλιγγενεσία). It refers to the spiritual rebirth or renewal that believers experience through Christ. In essence, “palingenesia” signifies a spiritual transformation, a new beginning, and a complete change in one’s nature. Or as many have claimed, “the outward sign of inward faith”, or “to show that you have been saved”. Is this what the Bible claims about baptism? I don’t think so. But please study this subject with an open mind and search all the Scriptures.

1 PETER 2: SUFFERING (2)

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

1 Peter 2:18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and gentle, but also to those who are harsh. 19 For this finds favor, if for the sake of conscience toward God a person endures grief when suffering unjustly. 20 For what credit is there if, when you sin and are harshly treated, you endure it with patience? But if when you do what is right and suffer for it you patiently endure it, this finds favor with God.

Christ Is Our Example

21 For you have been called for this purpose, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you would follow in His steps, 22 He who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth; 23 and while being abusively insulted, He did not insult in return; while suffering, He did not threaten, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously; 24 and He Himself brought our sins in His body up on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live for righteousness; by His wounds you were healed. 25 For you were continually straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls.

This is the 2nd article on the suffering of the diaspora Christians in 1 Peter. Please read the first article for background. This article looks at the 2nd main section in the letter on suffering. Several key points;

1) It starts with servants (slaves) who suffer from harsh masters. (AI) “Estimates suggest that slavery was widespread in the Roman world, with anywhere from 25% to 40% of the population being enslaved. This means a substantial number of early Christians would have been slaves or former slaves, as the early church drew members from all walks of life within the Roman Empire.” Peter tells them be subject to (obey) and respect those harsh masters. God is pleased if such a suffering slave can endure it faithfully. He makes the point that there is no credit (kleos: Glory, Renown, Fame) if you suffer for doing something wrong. I have beloved brother and friend who suffered 25 years in prison for something he did wrong. He used that time to grow into a strong believer, so it all worked out well. But in the early church, believers were tortured, imprisoned, and killed for their faith, not for something wrong they did. If they can suffer with patience, that “finds favor with God’.

2) Christ is our example of “unjust, undeserved suffering”. Why did Jesus have to suffer so much in the scourging and crucifixion? He did have to die for our sins, but couldn’t God have allowed him to die without so much suffering and still accomplish God’s mission of saving sinners from sin? Of course he could have. He could have. just allowed Jesus to be poisoned or smothered by some enemy and die a quick, relatively painless death. He could have allowed a soldier to pierce Jesus through with a sword causing quick death. But God allowed him to undergo terrible suffering before he died. Jesus had seen many crucifixion victims hanging on crosses on the Roman roads, a warning to all about rebellion to the empire. That’s why he was in such agony in the Garden of Gethsemene, sweat as blood (that sounds like a “panic attack” to me). Such suffering from the nails on the cross that he cried out “My God, my God, why hast Thou forsaken me”? He hang for 6 long hours suffering on the cross. Was this really a necessary of God’s plan? It was. Not essential to save us, but to give suffering Christians an example to follow when they suffer unjustly. God knew that Christians would suffer for their faith through much of the 2,000 years of church history and He wanted to give them an example of how to suffer faithfully, not returning insult for insult, etc. Don’t retaliate or seek vengance: just trust God who will repay those who persecute His children. The Roman arenas where Christians were killed, Foxes Book of Martyrs, even torturing and killing Christians by the Catholic church, suffering in Muslim controlled countries or atheistic countries like China. We don’t experience persecution in the U.S. but Jesus’ example of suffering even helps us as we go through various trials that test our faith. How should you respond when insulted or mocked b/c of your faith? When you suffer from a harsh boss? When you suffer from an abusive husband (Peter deals with that later)? Is Jesus giving an example for passive resistence: “a way of opposing the government without using violence especially by refusing to obey laws.” This was what Ghandi did in India as he opposed the oppressive British colonialism rule over India. He was committed to non-violence, but he did led protest Marches like his 240 mile Salt March to protest British policies that took advantage of the Indians. Martin Luther King might be the perfect example of one following Jesus’ example. King was inspired by Ghandi, but more so by Jesus. He was totally committed to non-violence although he did lead non-violent peace marches and boycotts. He never encouraged breaking any civil laws. Jesus stood up to the corrupt leaders of the Jews. He didn’t just ignore the corruption. He never encouraged any opposition to the cruel Roman authorities. He told Peter to pay the temple tax. He did resort to some turning over of the tables in the temple but he never retaliated when he suffered personally. So, Jesus’ suffering was necessary in God’s plan, not to save us but to give suffering Christians an example of how to suffer. As Paul said in 2 Timothy 3:12 Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”

3) After his suffering on the cross, He completed God’s plan of salvation by dying on the cross for our sins. “By his wounds” (the scourging, the crown of thorns) we are healed. This has to mean “spiritual healing”. Jesus can still heal physical sickness but this is not a promise of physical healing to those who become Christian. I know a saved lady who is still in a wheelchair due to spinal bifida even after becoming a Christian. Isaiah predicted Jesus’s non-retaliatory suffering: Peter probably alludes to Isaiah 53:

Isaiah 53:However, it was our sicknesses that He Himself bore,
And our pains that He carried;
Yet we ourselves assumed that He had been afflicted,
Struck down by God, and humiliated.
5 But He was pierced for our offenses,
He was crushed for our wrongdoings;
The punishment for our well-being was laid upon Him,
And by His wounds we are healed.
6 All of us, like sheep, have gone astray,
Each of us has turned to his own way;
But the Lord has caused the wrongdoing of us all
To fall on Him.

7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
Yet He did not open His mouth;
Like a lamb that is led to slaughter,
And like a sheep that is silent before its shearers,
So He did not open His mouth.

Thus Hebrews 2:10 10 In bringing many sons and daughters to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect (teleioó: To complete, to perfect, to accomplish, to bring to an end.)through what he suffered.” His sufferings made God’s plan of salvation “complete” b/c it was an important part of the plan.

1 PETER 1: SUFFERING (1)

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

I Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who reside as strangers, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you.”

Peter wrote this letter to the Jewish Christians scattered (diaspora: Dispersion, Scattering) over several countries. That would be the Jewish diaspora: “The term diasporas is only ever applied to ethnic Jews in biblical texts (John 7:35; James 1:1; in the Apocrypha, 2 Maccabees 1:27; Judith 5:19), so if it were taken to mean Gentiles in 1 Peter 1:1, it would have to be a remarkable exception. It certainly wouldn’t be a natural reading of the verse.” (Derek Demars) Some say 1 Peter 2:10 shows that the letter was written to Gentile Christians, but I refer you to my article on 1 Peter 2:10-17 to discuss that verse which I do not think means Peter is writing to Gentile Christians. Also remember that Peter is the “apostles to the Jews” (Galatians 2), so it is more likely that Peter would be writing to the Jewish Christians among the Jewish diaspora than to Gentile Christians scattered. Gentile Christians were never scattered. The Jewish diaspora were the “chosen” remnant of the Jewish believers who accepted Jesus as the Messiah. They were sanctified in the Spirit and sprinkled with the blood of Jesus. John 7:35 NAS: to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks.

Usually we speak of the diaspora as the scattering of the Jews after the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, but Wikipedia says this: “A Jewish diaspora existed for several centuries before the fall of the Second Temple in 70 CE. The Jewish diaspora in the second Temple period (516 BCE – 70 CE) was created from various factors, including through the creation of political and war refugees, enslavement, deportation, overpopulation, indebtedness, military employment, and opportunities in business, commerce, and agriculture.[7] Before the middle of the first century CE, in addition to Judea, Syria and Babylonia, large Jewish communities existed in the Roman provinces of Egypt, Crete and Cyrenaica, and in Rome itself.[8] In 6 CE the region was organized as the Roman province of Judaea.” All Jews in the diaspora suffered wherever they were scattered, but Peter was writing to Jewish Christians who were scattered before 70 AD for whatever reasons to Cappadocia, Asia, Bithynia (Pontus) and Galatia. Peter died in 65 AD, so he wrote I Peter before that.

Much of 1 Peter deals with the suffering and trials that the diaspora faced. So let’s look at the sections that deal with their suffering.

1 Peter 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable, undefiled, and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 In this you greatly rejoice, even though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been distressed by various trials, 7 so that the proof of your faith, being more precious than gold which perishes though tested by fire, may be found to result in praise, glory, and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ; 8 and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory, 9 obtaining as the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

Several points from this section.

1) Christians have a “living” hope b/c of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Why “living”? B/c our Savior is not still dead like other religioius leaders of world religions, like Mohamed, Buddha, Zoroaster, the Bab, etc. Our Savior still lives to be our HIgh Priest forever. Also the resurrection of Jesus is the ultimate proof that He is the Son of God and Savior. No other world religion can offer such irrefutable proof of its validity.

2) The diaspora Christians had an imperishable inheritance, a salvation “ready to be revealed in the last time”. This indicates a future salvation of some kind. Vs 9 also:  “9 obtaining as the outcome of your faith, the salvation of your souls.” That would be a future salvation of some kind. But weren’t they already saved? Of course they were. So what is this salvation that is still in their future? Is it heaven? Could be. But it could be the same “immortality” that Paul said believers would receive at the resurrection of the dead which he said some of those he was writing to would still be alive to receive (1 Corinthians 15:50-54). That would have to be the resurrection of the dead at 70 AD, predicted by Daniel 12:1-2 to happen at the end of the Jewish Age in 70 AD. Paul said in Acts 24:15 that there “is about to be (mello, which always in the NT means “about to happen”) a resurrecton of the righteous and the unrighteous just as the Law and Prophets predicted. This is the “already, not yet” phase of salvation for the transiton Christians (those living between 30AD and 70AD): already saved but not yet received immortality until the resurrection in 70 AD.

3) They could rejoice even in he midst of “distressing” (lupeó: To grieve, to cause sorrow, to distress) suffering and trials, looking forward to that future salvation.

4) A tested, proven (dokimion: Testing, trial, proving) by enduring trials faithfully would result in “praise, glory, and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ (i.e. his 2nd coming). Again, that is a reward in their future. While most say this 2nd coming revelation (apokalupsis: Revelation, unveiling, disclosure) of Jesus, full preterism would say that this 2nd coming was at 70 AD. 1 Peter 4:13 calls this 2nd coming a “revelation of his glory”. So what is the “glory” that these diaspora believers would receive at 70 AD if they remained faithful? Romans 8:18 For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time [are] not worthy [to be compared] with the glory about to be (mello) revealed in us. 21 that also the creation itself shall be set free from the servitude of the corruption to the liberty of the glory of the children of God; 23 And not only [so], but also we ourselves, having the first-fruit of the Spirit, we also ourselves in ourselves do groan, adoption expecting — the redemption of our body; (Young’s Literal Translation). Notice that this glory to be received by believers was “about to be revealed”. Many try to make this some, still in our future, restoration of the created earth to its Garden of Eden state, but this event is “about to” happen in the lifetime of those Paul is writing to, so it can’t be something in our future. So this must refer to the 2nd coming in 70 AD when God would destroy the temple and send the Romans to kill 1 million evil Jews in Jerusalem who rejected Jesus as the Messiah. When He did that, it would be obvious that the Jewish remnant believers in Jesus were the true children of God, not the unbelieving Jews who still claimed to be the children of Abraham and of God (John 8). The believing Jews would be “glorified” at the 2nd coming in 70 AD. 1 Peter 5:1 Elders who [are] among you, I exhort, who [am] a fellow-elder, and a witness of the sufferings of the Christ, and of the glory about to be revealed (again, mello)a … This glory of 1 Peter 1:7 was “about to be revealed” to them at 70 AD. It would indeed be “glorious” as they would be given immortality and imperishable, spiritual bodies that would live forever even after physical death (1 Corinthians 15).

5) They could rejoice even while “distressed” in their suffering and trials with “joy inexpressible and full of glory” over the prospects of receiving glory and immortality at the 2nd coming of Jesus in 70 AD. Again, we can’t ignore the fact that this is all “about to happen”.

In a way, we can’t relate to these suffering diaspora Christians. The Voice of the Martyrs constantly tells us about believers in foreign countries who are suffering just as the diaspora Christians were. This letter is more applicable to them than us, and they probably love this letter more than we do in the U.S. where we really don’t suffer persecution. While our lack of suffering is a good thing, it probably makes us weaker, materialistic Christians. Even if these verses mean heaven when one dies instead of 70 AD, a suffering Christian can rejoice at the prospect of the glory to be received in heaven in eternal life. Suffering believers long for that release from their suffering. They rejoice in their suffering for Jesus, and they even rejoice when a believer is martyred for his/her faith.That just sounds foreign to believers in the U.S. who don’t really suffer persecution.

But that doesn’t mean that we can’t rejoice over the prospects of eternal life after we die. After 70 AD, all believers receive their immortal, spiritual bodies when they become Christians. That allows them to “live even if they die physically” (John 11:24-26). We might not suffer persecution as the diaspora did, but we still go through a lot of trials or testing of our faith. We have a lot of “1st world” problems to endure. Our faith is constantly tested by the agnostic and atheistic attacks on the Bible, God, and Jesus. We are being mocked for our conservative stands on LGBQT and abortion. Bellevers are “distressed” by things like divorce, death of loved ones especially children, child abuse, infidelity of one’s mate, one’s children addicted to drugs, serious or even fatal illnesses of ourselves or loved ones, mental or physical abuse by one’s mate, poverty for some, the terminal illness especially in old age that brings a lot of physical suffering, etc.. These things might not be some Muslim terrorists killing us, burning our church buildings, and putting us in. prison for our faith, but they are real trials nonetheless. We can rejoice in those. trials, knowing that we will live on after death in eternity in our immortal spiritual bodies.

THE APOSTLE PETER

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

Here is a neat site with a timeline of Peter’s life: https://totallyhistory.com/biblical-history/simon-peter-the-apostle/ It has the main events and timeline along with the verses which I am not including below. Here is my summary of all the events in Peter’s life.

Peter starts his first letter to the Jewish Christians who were scattered over several countries with the words “Peter an apostle of Jesus Christ”. He was a Galilean fisherman and married. His brother Andrew, a disciple of John the Baptist, found Peter and told him that he had found the Messiah. Jesus changed his name from Simon to Cephas, which translated means Peter (Gk petros, a stone). Jesus calls Peter and Andrew to. follow him and they do. Jesus heals Peter’s sick mother-in-law. After fishing all night and catching nothing, Jesus tells Peter to cast his net into the water and he caught many fish. Peter is part of the inner circle of Peter, James, and John who see Jesus raise a dea d girl. Jesus walks on water to the boat the apostles were in during a storm, and Peter asks to walk on water to Jesus. He does so until he looks at the waves and sinks, but Jesus pulled him up. Peter makes the great confession, “You are the Christ the Son of the Living God”. Jesus tells Peter, “Upon this rock (either the apostle Peter or the confession that Peter made) I will build my church. Jesus would give Peter the keys to the kingdom. Peer rebukes Jesus when he tells him that he must suffer, be killed and rasied on the third day. Along with James and John, Peter sees Jesus transformed on the Mt of Transformation (he also sees Moses and Elijah). Jesus tells Peter that he will deny him 3 times but Peter says that he will never deny Jesus. Jesus leaves Peter, James and John to pray for him as he agonizes in the Garden of Gethsemane over his coming death. When Jesus is arrested in the Garden, Perter cuts off the ear of a servant. Peter goes to Pilate’s palace where he denies knowing Jesus 3 times. Mary Magdelene tells the apostles that the tomb of Jesus is empty and Peter and John run to the tomb. Jesus makes a separate appearance to Peter at some point after his resurrection. Jesus appeared to the 11 apostles, including Peter, the Sunday night of his resurrection that morning, and then again to the 12 apsotles, including Thomas, one week later. Jesus appears to Peter and 6 other apostles while fishing on the Sea of Galilee, and gives them a miraculous catch of fish. While eating with them that morning after the catch, Peter tells Jesus that he loves him three times as Jesus tells him to “feed my sheep”. Peter and the 10 apostles (judas is gone) see Jesus ascend into heaven from Galilee. Peter leads in the choosing of a replacement for Judas who had hanged himself (Matthias was chosen). After speaking in tongues (foreign languages) along with the other apostles, Peter preaches the first gospel sermon on the day of Pentecost, and 3,000 are baptized for the remission of sins. Peter and John heal a man at the temple who had been lame since birth. Peter and John are taken into custody by the Sadducees and warned not to preach Jesus any more. Peter confronts Ananias and Sapphira about their lying about their giving money and they are struck dead. Peter and John go to Samaria to lay their hands on those baptized there by Philip who had not received the Holy Spirit and Simon the Magician is rebuked for trying to buy the power to impart miraculous gifts. Peter heals a paralyzed Aenaes in Lydda and raises Dorcas from the dead in Joppa. Peter is sent by God to Cornelius, a Gentile centurion, in Caesarea. Peter preaches the gospel to him and Cornelius speaks in tongues to show that God will accept Gentiles for salvation and inclusion in the church. Cornelius is baptized. Back in Jerusalem, Peter is confronted by Jewish Christians for associating with Gentiles, but they are appeased when they hear about Cornelius speaking in tongues. Peter is put in prison by Herod who had just executed James the brother of John, but is released by an angel and goes to the house of Mary, the mother of John Mark. In Antioch of Syria, Paul rebukes Peter because he, influenced by some brethren from James the Lord’s brother in Jerusalem, has quit eating with the Gentile believers. Tradition says that Peter is crucified upside down in Rome by Nero because he felt unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as Jesus was.

We have so much more information about Peter’s life than any other apostle. Was he more important than the other apostles? Yes. He became the “apostle to the Jews” according to Paul. Galatians 2:7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles).” But was he the first pope, the head of the church? No. The whole claim that Peter was the first pope comes from Jesus telling Peter: Matthew 16:18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” I have read the debates: Is the “rock” Peter himself or the confession that Peter made that “Jesus is the Christ the Son of God”? But even if the rock is Peter, does that mean that he will be the first Pope, the head of the church? No. Ephesians 4:11 gives the leadership offices of the early church: “apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers”. Don’t you think that the position of “pope” would be included in that list if such a position was authorized by Jesus. Paul called Peter one of the “pillars of the church” along with James the Lord’s brother and John the apostle. Peter is not singled out as being above James and John. Many other arguments could be made against Peter being the first pope, but that will suffice for now.

So what are the highlights of Peter’s life? Would it be walking on water? Would it be the miraculous catches of fish? Would it be his confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? Would it be seeing the resurrected Jesus on several occarions? Would it be preaching the first gospel sermon in Acts 2? Would it be healing the sick and raising the dead? Would it be converting the first Gentile Cornelius?

What would be the “lowlights” of Peter’s life? Would it be sinking as he walked on the water? Would it be rebuking Jesus for saying that he would die and be raised, only to be rebuked by Jesus? Would it be denying Jesus 3 times, the last time with Jesus glancing out at Peter from Pilate’s hall? Would it be his time in jail, especially right after James was killed by Herod. Would it be his confusion about eating the meat in the sheet vision and what that meant relative to the conversion of Cornelius? Would it be the conflict with Paul in the church at Antioch (Galatians 2) over eating with Gentile believers? Would it be his last imprisonment in Rome before he was crucified?

Overall, this man’s life is amazing. He is usually the first one to speak out his opinions, questions, or doubts. He ends up being rebuked by Jesus more than any other apostle. He has the faith to walk on water (none of the other apostles did) but then he sinks. He is the only apostle to make the great confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, but then he denies Jesus 3 times. But instead of committing suicide like Judas, Peter becomes the chief spokesman apostle in the establishment of the first church. God confirms that the Gentiles like Cornelius are accepted in full fellowship with the Jews, and yet he acts hypocritically when men from James in Jerusalem influence him to quit eating with the Gentile Christians in Antioch. He is an “enigma”: “If you call a person an enigma, you mean that they’re hard to figure out—the reasons behind what they say and do are not easily understood.” Peter can be so weak and then he can be so strong. Maybe Jesus summed up Peter in Luke 22:31 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you, that he might sift you like wheat, 32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.” As soon as Jesus said that, 33 Peter said to him, “Lord, I am ready to go with you both to prison and to death.” 34 Jesus said, “I tell you, Peter, the rooster will not crow this day, until you deny three times that you know me.” Peter bragged that he would die for Jesus instead of denying him, and yet within 24 hours later he denied Jesus 3 times just like Jesus predicted. After his 3rd denial: Luke 22:60 And immediately, while he was still speaking, the rooster crowed. 61 And the Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the saying of the Lord, how he had said to him, “Before the rooster crows today, you will deny me three times.” 62 And he went out and wept bitterly.” It is amazing that Peter did not commit suicide like Judas did. It is amazing that Peter made a comeback like Jesus prayed for him: “but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”” Jesus knew he would brag about not denying Jesus but would fail. The key was how he responded to his failure.

Isn’t that the main lesson we get from Peter. How many times have you failed in your faith journey or let Jesus down? How did you feel? Guilty? Ashamed? But Jesus is always there to love us, forgive us, and use us “if” we will “turn” back to our faith. Yes, Peter failed when he walked on water, but he was the only one with the faith to try. Maybe he learned a valuable lesson from that (it had to be very scary). Would you have even tried to walk on the water? Do you ever venture out in your faith to attempt amazing things for Jesus?

WHY FULL PRETERISM? GOING FROM PARTIAL TO FULL PRETERISM!

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

(AI) “Preterism is a Christian belief that some or all of the Bible’s prophecies have already happened in history. The word comes from the Latin word praeter, which means “past” or “beyond”.” Most Bible scholars are “partial preterists” b/c they beleve many Bible prophecies have already happened. Some even believe that many of the new testament prophecies were fulfilled at the 70 AD destruction of the temple and of Jerusalem (prophecies that are often said to have not happened yet as of today). Few are “full preterists” who say that all the Bible prophecies have already happened, including the 2nd coming, the resurrection of the dead, the 70th week of Daniel, the new heavens and earth, the new Jerusalem, etc. This article: what factors would make someone move from partial preterism to full preterism?

  1. Jesus predicts that his 2nd coming would be within the lifetime of those he was speaking to. There are only 4 times in the synoptics where he predicts a 2nd coming or coming again: Matthew 10:23; 16:27,28; 24:30-34; 26:64. (My blog article “the 2nd coming of Jesus”). That either happened as Jesus predicted in the next 40 years after he predicted it (the word genea in Matthew 24:34 always means a 40 year period or tehe people living in a 40 year period in the NT), or else Jesus: 1) is a false prophet, or 2) he was mistaken (as C.S.Lewis claimed) which would make him a false prophet, or 3) he did predict an imminent 2nd coming but “delayed it” (Hebrews 10:37 refutes any delay theories: “37 for yet a very very little, He who is coming will come, and will not tarry”). Matthew 16:27-28 and Mark 8:38-9:1 is a key point. Some of those he was speaking to would still be alive at his 2nd coming. Matthew 16:28 28 Verily I say to you, there are certain of those standing here who shall not taste of death till they may see the Son of Man coming in his reign.'” Matthew 16:27 even uses the word mello (which always means “about to”) “For the Son of Man is “about to come” (usually translated incorrectly as “will come” except in Young’s Literal Translation). Some say the was predicting the Mount of Transfiguration that would happen soon after in Mt 17, but notice that these 2 parallel passages are both “coming in judgement” passages (“and then he will repay each person according to what he has done”). There was no judgment on the Mount of Transfiguration. Jesus’ coming in judgment ( 2nd coming) in 70 AD to judge the evil Jews who rejected him as the Messiah fulfills Jesus’ predictions of an imminent 2nd coming. Those predictions involve some figurative language such as the “stars falling” (Matthew 24:29) which can easily be seen to have a figurative not literal fulfillment based on OT predictions that use the same language to describe the destruction of Babylon, for example (Isaiah 13).
  2. I challenge you to find a verse in the gospels where Jesus predicts a “coming back” that is not to be fulfilled in the lifetime of those he is speaking to. Don’t you think that there would be a verse that did that? So why am I a “heretic” for defending Jesus’ credibility as a prophet just b/c I believe that what he predicted came true exactly as he predicted? I would never make full preterism a heaven or hell issue, just as I would not make any eschatological beliefs a heaven or hell issue (such as premillennialism or postmillennialism). But I just don’t understand why some would say I am a heretic for believing that Jesus’ predictions came true exactly as he predicted. The 3 options above if his predictions did not come true as predicted are just not acceptable. Some full preterists claim that it is heresy not to believe that the 2nd coming was in 70 AD but I don’t take that position although I think there is a lot at stake here. Unbelieving Jews, atheists, and Muslims all claim that Jesus is a false prophet b/c they say his predictions did not come true as predicted, and you can see why they would say that if indeed his predictions did not come true as predicted.
  3. Believing that the resurrection of the dead occurred at 70 AD is one of the hardest hurdles to overcome in moving from partial to full preterism. But here are some points to consider. Acts 24:14 `And I confess this to thee, that, according to the way that they call a sect, so serve I the God of the fathers, believing all things that in the law and the prophets have been written,15 having hope toward God, which they themselves also wait for, [that] there is about to be a rising again of the dead, both of righteous and unrighteous” (YLT). Paul is saying 2 things: 1) the resurrection of the dead was “about to” (mello) happen, and 2) the Law and Prophets predicted this resurrection that was about to happen. So where did the prophets predict a resurrection of the righteous and unrighteous? Daniel 12:2 And many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt. That is the only place in the OT that predicts this resurrection. And yet Paul says it is “about to happen”. So is Paul mistaken (which is untenable since it would make him not inspired and how would we know which of his writings are inspired and which are not?. Is Paul just another false prophet who thinks the 2nd coming and resurrection are imminent but is wrong? The whole chapter 12 in Daniel is about the “end time” , “the end”, the “tribulation of the Jewish nation” (which Jesus spoke of in Mt 24, a tribulation that had to occur within that generation Matthew 24:34), and the “abomination of desolation” (the destruction and desecration of the temple). Jesus said in Matthew 24:15 that the abomination of desolation as predicted by Daniel would be fulfilled within the lifetime of the generation living when he was saying this (Matthew 24:34 the word genea in the NT always refers to a 40 year period or the people living in a 40 year period). So Daniel 12:2 is also referring to a resurrection of the dead at the end of the age in 70 AD. Paul said that resurrection was about to happen. All the dead in the OT went to Hades to await their resurrection and final judgment of eternal life or eternal destruction in 70 AD. In 70 AD they were raised, not bodily to be seen, but spiritually just as Paul predicted. I believe that happened just as Paul predicted, or else Paul is a false prophet. Paul gives further detail on this resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15. He says that some of those he is writing to would still be alive at the resurrection. 15:51 Behold, I am telling you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed.” He says that the believers, whether dead or alive at the resurrection (the Daniel 12:2 resurrection) will be given “immortality”. 15:53 For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 But when this perishable puts on the imperishable, and this mortal puts on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.” Is Paul mistaken about this prediction also? This resurrection to immortality occurred within their lifetime in 70 AD. All believers since that date receive immortality when they believe (they can lose it if they fall from grace) and as Jesus said in John 11, “they will live even if they die (physically)”. So the belief that the resurrection of the dead occurred at 70 AD is not only Biblical, but is not a big hurdle in going from partial to full preterism.
  4.  The other NT writers and apostles also predicted an imminent 2nd coming. James 5:8 You too be patient; strengthen your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is near.” Is James a false prophet? 1 Peter 4:5 who shall give an account to Him who is ready (hetoimós: Ready, prepared) to judge living and dead… 7 The end of all things is near (eggizó: To draw near, to approach, to come near: same word as used in Mark 14:42 he who betrays me is “at hand”).” Is Peter the apostle a false prophet? What about the apostle John? He said that the events predicted in the book of Revelation were to take place “soon” (1:1), “the time is near (eggus: Near, close, at hand)” (1:3), “soon take place” (22:6), “the time is near” (22:10). The book is about the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, a follow up of all that Jesus predicted in Mt 24, Mk 13, and Lk 21. But it is also about the 2nd coming: Rev 1:7 Behold, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen.” John says repeated that Jesus said “I am coming quickly” (2:16; 3:11; 22:12,20)”. Some say that just means “swiftly” but it obviously means “soon” since the events were “about to happen” (mello which always means “about to happen” in the NT) (1:19; 2:10; 3:10,16; 6:11; 8:13; 12:5). So is John the apostle a false prophet also? Let’s throw in another prediction by Paul here. 2 Timothy 4:1I do fully testify, then, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to (mello) judge living and dead at his manifestation and his reign (YLT).” This fits an AD 70 judgment also.
  5. The book of Hebrews also predicts the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD and the 2nd coming. Hebrews 9:28 so Christ also, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time for salvation without reference to sin, to those who eagerly await Him.” But when would this 2nd appearing or coming happen? Hebrews 10:37 For yet in a very little while,
    He who is coming will come, and will not delay.” That 2nd appearing or coming would be in a very little while. That can only refer to his 2nd coming in 70 AD or else the writer of the Hebrew letter is a false prophet. The letter also predicts that the old covenant is “about to disappear” (8:13), which would fit 70 AD when the temple was destroyed, no more animal sacrifices since then, no more priests, and replaced with the new covenant. The book was definitely written before 70 AD: Hebrews 9:8 The Holy Spirit is signifying this, that the way into the holy place has not yet been disclosed while the outer tabernacle is still standing.” The verb “is” indicates that the temple “is” still standing at the time the letter was written. It would be destroyed in 70 AD. Unfortunately a lot of the translations have “was still standing” which is not the accurate verb tense in Greek. Hebrews 6:5 predicts the new age (i.e. the Messianic Age) that is “about to come” (mello). Hebrews 13:14 predicts a city (i.e. the new Jerusalem) that is “about to come” (mello). We don’t know who wrote the Hebrew letter, but whoever wrote it (and Paul did not write it) did so before 70 AD and his/her predictions would come true in 70 AD. He/she was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit.
  6. We must discuss 2 Thessalonians as a separate point since it is mainly about the 2nd coming. Chapter 1 says that Jesus will be revealed from heaven (i.e. the 2nd coming) to give relief to the Thessalonian Christians who are being afflicted or persecuted. Paul had said in 1 Thess 2:14 that they were being persecuted by their Jewish non believing countrymen but “wrath has come upon them (i.e. the Jewish unbelievers who were killed in 70 AD) fully.” (2:17). The main persecutors and killers of the Jewish Christians during the transition period from AD 30-70 were the Jewish unbelievers like Saul. Jesus’ 2nd coming in 70 AD would have the Romans killing a million evil Jews who rejected Jesus as the Messiah, so 2 Thess 1 certainly fits that context of giving the believers relief. It is always important that we. understand “audience relevance”, i.e. how does a passage relate to the audience it was written to. But some were saying that the 2nd coming “had already come” (2 Thess 2:2). Paul then goes on to say that before the 2nd coming there would be an “apostasy” (which could be a falling away of believers or it could be the Jewish revolt in years preceding 70 AD), and a “man of sin” would come with lying signs and wonders. This man of sin would claim to be god and would sit in God’s temple. This can only refer to Titus. Once the temple is destroyed in 70 AD, there is no temple for the man of sin to sit in, which eliminates all the many predictions of who the man of sin is (such as the papacy, some future Antichrist). Some person was holding that man of sin back at the time of writing, but 2 Thess 2:7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is removed. 8 Then that lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will eliminate with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming.” These verses tell us that this process was already at work at the time of writing. The man of sin was living at the time of writing. The man of sin (living at that time) would be judged at Jesus’ coming or appearing, which means the 2nd coming would have to be within the lifetime of those Paul is writing to.” Again, is Paul inspired? Did these things happen within the lifetime of those he was writing to or is he a false prophet? Paul had already spoken of the 2nd coming in the first letter to the Thessalonians: 1 Thess 1:10; 2:19; 3:13; 5:2. Would that no be the same 2nd coming that he gave further discussion on in 2 Thessalonians? I think so! So those verses in 1 Thess are talking about the 2nd coming within their lifetime, in 70 AD. That brings us to another somewhat of a hurdle to full preterism in 1 Thess 4:13-18. The early Christians in the transition period from 30-70 AD all expected Jesus’ 2nd coming to be imminent, in their lifetime. Why would they think that? As James Stuart Russell said, “because Jesus and the apostles told them it would be imminent in their lifetime!” So they were concerned when a few of their loved ones also believers, died before the 2nd coming (70 AD), that they would not be alive to receive and immortality at the 2nd coming. Paul says, “don’t worry about them. Jesus will bring them with him when he comes (1 Thess 4:14). Apparently during this transition period the dead believers (and martyrs) would go directly to be with Jesus when they died. They would not go to hades like all the dead in the OT. Revelation 20:4 speaks of this “first resurrection” of those martyred during the transition period as occurring at the beginning of the 100 year reign of Christ. The “rest of the dead”, i.e. the dead of the OT who were waiting in hades for their resurrection in 70 AD at the end of the age (Daniel 12:2; Acts 24:15), would not be raised till the end of the 1000 years which would be in 70 AD. At the end of the 1000 years, Gog and Magog (Rome) would “surround the beloved city (i.e. Jeruslem), so if that is something that has to happen “soon” or “shortly” then the end of the 1000 years would be the Romans sieging and detroying the city of Jerusalem. That means that the 1000 years is a figurative number (as often done in Revelation) and is the 40 years from AD 30 to AD 70. That destroys the theories about Christ coming in our future to set up a 1000 year reign on earth (the millennium) that many preach about today. BTW Jesus said that his kingdom was “not of this earth” (John 18:36); his kingdom that was “at hand” when he spoke (Mark 1:15) was the spiritul kingdom, the church, that began in 30 AD. Back to 1 Thess 4. Paul goes on to say that those already dead in Christ (those Jesus is bringing with him) will join those still alive to meet Jesus when he comes. Those alive would be caught up together with those dead to meet Jesus when he comes and “will always be with the Lord” (4:17). Some say this is the “rapture” of saints before or at the 2nd coming. Is this not the same 2nd coming as in 2 Thessalonians, which would be in 70 AD? If so, then this is not a prediction of some rapture of saints that will occur in our future at some future 2nd coming of Jesus. It is simply a reference to a common practice of that day. If a dignitary or king came to visit a city, the residents of the city would go out to meet the king and then the king would go with them into the city to be with them in person. Paul is saying that those living would figuratively meet Jesus as He came to earth in His 2nd coming, after which Jesus would go with them and abide with them in their presence. He is not taking anyone back to heaven. He is coming to make His presence with the believers on earth in the church. From the 2nd coming in 70 AD on Jesus has dwelt by faith in believers in the new Jerusalem, i.e. the church (Rev 21:1-4). But the main point here is that 1 Thess 4:13-18 must be talking about the same 2nd coming as in 2 Thess, which would be in their lifetime, in 70 AD. So forget all the rapture ideas that you here. We believers have already been caught up with Jesus’ presence in the church.
  7. In closing, I hope this will be helpful for someone who is a partial preterist but is contemplating becoming a full preterist. If you do become a full preterist, you are not going to be a heretic, at least in my estimation even if some would consider that to be heresy. You must be willing to go where the Scriptures lead you even if it goes against 2,000 years of church orthodoxy and doctrine. I am more interested in what the Bible says than what people say that it says.
  8. If you just don’t want to consider all this as worth studying, that’s fine. It is not a heaven or hell issue (no eschatological theory is a heaven or hell issue). Just keep trusting in Jesus for eternal life and doing good works to glorify God. That is what really matters, not eschatology. But some of us, like I, must study and teach about this issue in light of all the false teaching that is currently being taught. Thanks for reading and I hope this article has been helpful to some.

1 CORINTHIANS 9 Paul chose not to use his rights

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

1 Corinthians 9:9 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2 If I am not an apostle to others, at least I am to you; for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.

3 My defense to those who examine me is this: 4 Do we not have a right to eat and drink? 5 Do we not have a right to take along a believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas? 6 Or do only Barnabas and I have no right to refrain from working? 7 Who at any time serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat its fruit? Or who tends a flock and does not consume some of the milk of the flock?

8 I am not just asserting these things according to human judgment, am I? Or does the Law not say these things as well? 9 For it is written in the Law of Moses: “You shall not muzzle the ox while it is threshing.” God is not concerned about oxen, is He? 10 Or is He speaking entirely for our sake? Yes, it was written for our sake, because the plowman ought to plow in hope, and the thresher to thresh in hope of sharing in the crops. 11 If we sowed spiritual things in you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? 12 If others share the right over you, do we not more? Nevertheless, we did not use this right, but we endure all things so that we will cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ. 13 Do you not know that those who perform sacred services eat the food of the temple, and those who attend regularly to the altar have their share from the altar? 14 So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.

Before we look at 1 Corinthians 9, we need to tie it in to 1 Corinthians 8. In chapter 8 (please read my article on 1 Corinthians 8-10) Paul discussed what it meant to cause a weak brother to stumble and sin. Without going through the chapter here, we want to just focus on his last statement in chapter 8: 13 Therefore, if food causes my brother to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause my brother to sin. So in chapter 9, his basic point is: I am not an apostle like the other apostles (I saw the resurrected Jesus on the road to Damascus which qualifies me to be an apostle). He gave the Corinthians miraculous gifts by the laying on of his hands which made them the seal of his apostleship, proving that he was an apostle. I have the right to eat the meat offered to idols, but I choose to not eat. So he ends up discussing how he had. right to marry (like the other apostles) but chose not to; he had a right to not have to work for a living but chose not to. 15 But I have used none of these things. And I have not written these things so that it will be done so in my case. I chose not to use my freed to do these things, and I am not writing this to get you to start allowing me to do these things.15:for it would be better for me to die than that. No one shall make my boast an empty one! 16 For if I preach the gospel, I have nothing to boast about, for I am under compulsion; for woe to me if I do not preach the gospel. 17 For if I do this voluntarily, I have a reward; but if against my will, I have been entrusted with a commission nonetheless. 18 What, then, is my reward? That, when I preach the gospel, I may offer the gospel without charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel. He sees his reward as being able to preach the gospel for free, not using his right to charge for preaching.

Paul says that he could have charged money for preaching the gospel to the Corinthians. He gave examples of soldiers getting pid, farmers getting to eat some of their vineyard fruit, and shepherds drinking some milk from the flock. He cited the Law: 9:9 You shall not muzzle the ox while it is threshing”, saying that applied to people and not just oxen. He cited the priests who ate some of the offerings of the people. 14 So also the Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.”

Is Paul defending the paid local preacher system that most churches use today (not house churches)? I guess you could say that he was based on vs 14, but I don’t think he was! Remember, the church met in house churches. The leadership in the house churches was elders and deacons. They had teachers and maybe prophets, but there were no full time paid local preachers in house churches. Then you had apostles and evngelists. The evangelists would travel church to church, town to town, working with congregations on a short term basis or preaching the gospel to establish churches (“evangelists” comes from the word which meant “to announce the good tidings of the gospel”). These traveling evangelists were given food and a place to stay, but they did not become full time local paid preachers. That was started when churches left the house churches and built buidings in the 4th century with paid priests. It evolved into what. we have now with full time paid preachers in what could be called the “church business”. So I don’t think Paul was suggesting full time paid preachers. I think he was talking about those apostles and evangelists who traveled church to church, town to town, and therefore could not do self supporting jobs. They were worthy of support. 9: 11 If we sowed spiritual things in you, is it too much if we reap material things from you? 12 If others share the right over you, do we not more? Nevertheless, we did not use this right, but we endure all things so that we will cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ. 

But Paul felt strongly about not taking any money or support from the congregation that he was working with. He made tents and supported himself in Corinth. He did receive some money/supplies from the church at Philippi while working in Corinth to allow him more time to preach the gospel. Philippians 4:15 You yourselves also know, Philippians, that at the first preaching of the gospel, after I left Macedonia, no church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving except you alone; 16 for even in Thessalonica you sent a gift more than once for my needs.He told the Ephesian elders: Acts 20: 33 I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or clothes. 34 You yourselves know that these hands served my own needs and the men who were with me. 35 In everything I showed you that by working hard in this way you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’” So to Paul this was a matter of deep conviction.

Is it a sin to have full time paid preachers? First of all, I suppose you could argue that that is a “right” someone or some church could use based on this chapter. It is not a Biblical system, but maybe some can justify it. But is it a wise use of the Lord’s money? Most churches haves several talented, knowledgable men who could preach and teach the word without paying a preacher. But most churches feel that they need a full time preacher who is a talented speaker to compete with other churches. We, like Israel (1 Samuel 8) want to have a “king to be like the other nations”! Then we hire full time youth ministers, educational directors, secretaries, etc.

Paul then tells why he chooses not to use his rights to eat meat, to be paid, etc. He did so for the sake of his influence among the lost, so they would not accuse him of preaching for money. 9:19 For though I am free from all people, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may gain more. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the Law, I became as one under the Law, though not being under the Law myself, so that I might gain those who are under the Law; 21 to those who are without the Law, I became as one without the Law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might gain those who are without the Law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak; I have become all things to all people, so that I may by all means save some. 23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.

One verse is interesting. 9:20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might gain Jews; to those who are under the Law, I became as one under the Law, though not being under the Law myself, so that I might gain those who are under the Law.” But we know that Paul kept the Law strictly even after he became a Christian. In Acts 24 Paul challenged them to bring forth evidence that he was breaking the Law of Moses. Acts 21:20 And when they heard about them, they began glorifying God; and they said to him, “You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; 21 and they have been told about you, that you are teaching all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children nor to [e]walk according to the customs. 22 So what is to be done? They will certainly hear that you have come. 23 Therefore, do as we tell you: we have four men who have a vow upon themselves; 24 take them along and purify yourself together with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and then everyone will know that there is nothing to what they have been told about you, but that you yourself also conform, keeping the Law. 25 But regarding the Gentiles who have believed, we sent a letter, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and what is [k]strangled, and from sexual immorality.” 26 Then Paul took along the men, and the next day, after purifying himself together with them, he went into the temple giving notice of the completion of the days of purification, until the sacrifice was offered for each one of them.” Notice vs 24: but that you yourself also conform, keeping the Law.” He kept the Jewish vow to show that he had not been telling Jewish converts to quit keeping the Law after they became Christians. But this also was to show that he also was “keeping the Law”, which he was. But in 9:20 he says that “he was not under the Law”. Is that a contradiction? I actually did my thesis on this. Paul is not saying the he was no longer under any obligation to keep the Law after he became a Christian. All the Jewis Christians were under obligation to keep the Lw after becoming Christians all the way up to the end of the age in 70 AD. The Law was “perpetual”, i.e. age lasting. But Paul was no longer under the Law as a means of justification. Now he was under the new covennt law of grace and faith for justification.

But the main thought has to be 9:22 To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak; I have become all things to all people, so that I may by all means save some.” Back to the weak brother who believes it is a sin to eat meat offered to idols. If that brother sees Paul eating that meat and then eats also while having doubts and violating his conscience, then Paul has caused him to sin. If that be the case, then Paul says he would become like the weak brother and not eat meats ever in order to save that weak brother’s soul.

This requires self discipline, i.e. to not eat that meat even though you really want to eat it! So Paul closes with some comments on self discipline. 9:24 Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but only one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may win. 25 Everyone who competes in the games exercises self-control in all things. So they do it to obtain a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26 Therefore I run in such a way as not to run aimlessly; I box in such a way, as to avoid hitting air; 27 but I strictly discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.”

1 CORINTHIANS 8-10 WHO IS THE WEAK BROTHER?

On By nrfaughtLeave a comment

1 Corinthians 8:1 Now concerning food sacrificed to idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge [a]makes one conceited, but love edifies people. 2 If anyone thinks that he knows anything, he has not yet known as he ought to know; 3 but if anyone loves God, he is known by Him.

4 Therefore, concerning the eating of food sacrificed to idols, we know that an idol is [b]nothing at all in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, 6 yet for us there is only one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.

7 However, not all people have this knowledge; but some, being accustomed to the idol until now, eat food as if it were sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 Now food will not bring us [c]close to God; we are neither [d]the worse if we do not eat, nor [e]the better if we do eat. 9 But take care that this [f]freedom of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if someone sees you, the one who has knowledge, dining in an idol’s temple, will his conscience, if he is weak, not be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols? 11 For through your knowledge the one who is weak is ruined, the brother or sister for whose sake Christ died. 12 And so, by sinning against the brothers and sisters and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if food causes my brother to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause my brother to sin.”

First let’s set the background for this issue of eating meat offered to idols. From Guzik: “The meat offered on pagan altars was usually divided into three portions. One portion was burnt in honor of the god, one portion was given to the worshipper to take home and eat, and the third portion was given to the priest. If the priest didn’t want to eat his portion, he sold it at the temple restaurant or meat market. The meat served and sold at the temple was generally cheaper. Then, as well as now, people loved a bargain (including Christians). Things offered to idols: The issue raised many questions for the Corinthian Christians: Can we eat meat purchased at the temple meat market? What if we are served meat purchased at the temple meat market when we are guests in someone’s home? Can a Christian eat at the restaurant at the pagan temple?” I don’t know if this was a Jew/Gentile issue or not. I don’t guess it has to be. But probably most of the Corinthian converts were of Gentile background. Some would have no problem eating meat that had been offered to idols since, as Paul said, there are no real gods behind those idols. Others might think it is wrong to eat that meat since it had been offered to a god and this might seem like participating in the idol worship that they had given up to become a Christian.

Paul’s points are these: 1) The correct “knowledge” on this issue is that it is ok to eat the meat offered to idols since there are no real gods behind those idols. 2) If you have this correct knowledge on the issue, don’t be arrogant with that knowledge when dealing with those who don’t have that knowledge. “Knowledge makes one conceited but love edifies people”. 3) Not all Christians have the correct knowledge on this issue. When they eat meat offered to idols, it makes them feel like they are still worshipping the gods of those idols like they used to do. Their conscience will tell them it is wrong to et that meat even if someone tells them it is ok. 4) If a Christian has a strong conviction, then it doesn’t matter if he eats or doesn’t eat the meat. It’s not a heaven/hell issue. 5) But if a Christian thinks it is wrong to eat the meat, then will violate his conscience in doing so and that is a sin even if it is not actually wrong to eat the met. The sin is that he violates his conscience. The “weak” brother in this matter is the one who violates his conscience whether he has the correct knowledge or not on the issue. 6) A brother with strong conviction and a strong conscience against eating the meat will watch you eat the meat and have no problem with it. He will not be tempted to eat the meat and violate his conscience. 7) But a brother with a weak conscience will see you eat the meat and he might be tempted to follow your example and eat the meat also even though the whole time he is violating his conscience. He is sinning if he does that. 8) You perhaps have unintentionally caused him to eat the meat and sin by violating his conscience. He might be thinking, “Jack is a mature Christian so if he eats the meat, I guess I can eat it (and yet the whole time he eats he is violating his conscience and sinning). You have caused him to sin. You might even be arrogant and flippant about it, telling him “there’s nothing wrong with eating the meat, so eat up” without asking him if eating the meat would violate his conscience or not. 10) Paul said that he would never eat meat if it caused a weak brother to sin (as just described).

We skip over to 1 Corinthians 10: 23 All things are permitted, but not all things are of benefit. All things are permitted, but not all things build people up. 24 No one is to seek his own advantage, but rather that of his neighbor. 25 Eat anything that is sold in the meat market without asking questions, for the sake of conscience; 26 for the earth is the Lord’s, and all it contains. 27 If one of the unbelievers invites you and you want to go, eat anything that is set before you without asking questions, for the sake of conscience. 28 But if anyone says to you, “This is meat sacrificed to idols,” do not eat it, for the sake of that one who informed you and for the sake of conscience; 29 Now by “conscience” I do not mean your own, but the other person’s; for why is my freedom judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I partake with thankfulness, why am I slandered about that for which I give thanks?

These instructions in chapter 10 are for the brother who knows it is ok to eat the meat and his conscience doesn’t bother him when he eats. 11) If you have the correct knowledge that there is nothing wrong with eating the meat, then don’t even bother to ask if the meat you buy in the market was offered to idols. Just buy it and eat it. 12) If an unbeliever asks you over to eat, then eat the meat he prepares for you without asking where it came from. It will probably be meat from the market that has been offered to idols, but that won’t bother you and there are no Christians around to be concerned about. 13) But if you are at the unbeliever’s house eating and another guest is obviously bothered by meat offered to idols being served then don’t eat b/c you by eating might encourage him to eat and violate his conscience.

Now to one last section. 1 Corinthians 10:14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise people; you then, judge what I say. 16 Is the cup of blessing which we bless not a sharing in the blood of Christ? Is the bread which we break not a sharing in the body of Christ? 17 Since there is one loaf, we who are many are one body; for we all partake of the one loaf. 18 Look at the people of Israel; are those who eat the sacrifices not partners in the altar? 19 What do I mean then? That food sacrificed to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? 20 No, but I say that things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons and not to God; and I do not want you to become partners with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the table of the Lord and the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? We are not stronger than He, are we?23 All things are permitted, but not all things are of benefit. All things are permitted, but not all things build people up. 24 No one is to seek his own advantage, but rather that of his neighbor.”

This section adds another consideration in the discussion of eating meats or not. You might be one who can eat meats with clear conscience. You might could eat at a pagan feast where the meat is offered to idols. You might be strong enough to eat that meat without being tempted to worship the idol, and certainly the idol is nothing. But you are sharing in their worship just as you share with other believers when you take the cup and the bread in the Lord’s Supper. All things are permitted but not all things are of benefit. It is not wise to eat at the pagan feasts. It will hurt your influence and it cause a weak brother to sin if he sees you eating there. You have the Christian “liberty” or freedom to eat the meat but it might not be best for you to use that freedom.

So where would all this weak brother stuff apply today. The church I grew up in has a lot of such issues. Let’s just look at one: eating in the church building (and having a kitchen in the building). It might sound strange that someone would think that it is wrong to eat in the church building or have a kitchen in the building. After all, the church began in house churches where you would certainly eat meals and have a kitchen. The objection is that there are no “approved examples” of eating in the building. Also 1 Corinthians 11:34 if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment.” That passage is not forbidding eating in the building. The early church had a love feast when they met which was a meal, during which they also took the Lord’s Supper. So the verse can’t mean “don’t eat in the building”. The problem was that they were not waiting on each other to take the Lord’s Supper or eat the love feast meal. They were having cliques and divisions. Paul’s point is that, if you are just at the assembly to eat a meal b/c you are hungry, then eat at home. The love feast and Lord’s Supper should be a time when you all eat together in love. As far as needing an “approved example” to eat in the building, why do you need an approved example. Who says that you can only do something if you have an approved example? Who says that, if you do have an approved example of the early church doing something in a particular way, that that is the only authorized way you can do that?

Having said all that, what if you still have a brother who believes it is wrong to eat in the building. He would violate his conscience if he ate in the building. So your elders decide to have a kitchen and have church meals in the building. First of all, this is not a heaven/hell issue, so you can “agree to disagree”. Romans 14:1 As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. 2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables. 3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him. 4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.” The one who eats and the one who doesn’t eat should not judge one another. Certainly don’t withdraw fellowship from one another. If the church is having a meal in the building, then the one who feels it is wrong should simply not eat the meal. He should not expect the others to not eat just b/c he is not going to eat. He should not say to them, “if you eat then you will offend me and therefore you should not eat”. We had a lot of people using that logic in my church, but you shouldn’t restrict someone else’s liberty to do something just b/c you don’t do it. But what if a brother feels that it is wrong to eat in the building and yet he has a weak conscience. He sees others eating and thinks, “well I guess its ok to eat since they are eating”. And then he eats but the whole time he eats his conscience is bothering him. He has sinned then. Not b/c the eating is a sin but b/c he is violating his conscience. Romans 14:23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” Your eating might have caused him to sin. So the key is communication and love. You need to make sure that anyone eating doesn’t have a problem with eating in the building. Let everyone know that they should follow their conscience on the matter.

That might sound like a frivolous example but it is a real example. Another might women be wearing the little doily in the assembly based on 1 Corinthians 11 wearing a veil when women pray in. mixed assembly. I won’t get into the right or wrong of the issue itself. But for sure it is not a heaven/hell issue. If a women feels she should wear the doily, then she should do so and not violate her conscience. Those who feel they don’t need to wear it should not judge those who disagree, and vice versa. The ones who don’t wear it should be careful to see if there is anyone who thinks they should wear it but don’t wear it b/c they see others not wearing it, and thus violate her conscience by not wearing it. I know that sounds frivolous, but it is a real issue in some churches.

Another more important issue might be drinking alcohol. If you believe it is ok to drink alcohol, then you need to be careful that you don’t influence someone to drink if they believe it is wrong. That would cause them to violate their conscience and sin. They might see you drinking and think “I guess it is ok” and then drink but the whole time violating his conscience. You may have, even unintentionally, caused him to sin by your drinking. So the key is to know how the other person feels about drinking, whether it is wrong. or not. Tell them to not drink if it bothers their conscience. It is not a heaven/hell issue so you can agree to disagree. I might add this. Even if you have the liberty to drink in moderation, you might decide not to drink alcohol at all since it might hurt your influence. Drinking is such a major issue nowadays. If you go to a social event where there is a lot of drinking, there will probably be a lot of drinking and some getting tipsy or even drunk. You are kinda like Paul’s example of attending the pagan feasts. It might be better if you didn’t drink at all if you attend (you might not have a choice on attending or not) or not attend at all.

I know this is long and drawn out, but a proper understanding of the weak brother issue is important.