The God of Order

The Bible reveals God’s many wonderful attributes. It speaks of his love, his power, his eternity. In 1 Corinthians 14:33 Paul tells us that God is not a God of confusion but of peace. This comes out, for example, in what the Bible says of creation. Chaos becomes order. In the Trinity, although the three persons are equal, there is definite order in the Godhead. All around us there is evidence of a marvellous orderliness from God. That is why even in a Jackson Pollock painting some order may be discerned!

In 1 Corinthians 14:40 Paul draws a practical conclusion from this fact. In meetings for worship, everything should be done in a fitting, dignified, decent way. The application is not limited to meetings. It applies to the whole of life. All the great advances in science and civilisation have come in the train of organisation and order. Of course, great things are sometimes discovered by accident, but it is the methodical, orderly person who sees their importance.

This is an appropriate thought for the beginning of a new year. It is true that there is something slightly artificial about marking a new year but it is a fact that God made this world to orbit the Sun every 365 ¼ days. He gave it a moon that takes 28 days to orbit. He makes the earth revolve on its axis every 24 hours. These are not accidents. The stars were given to mark the passing seasons. Further by direct command God has ordained that there should be seven days in one week and that one day should be different to the other six and kept special in his honour. Part of the indignity of drunkenness, serious illness and sometimes old age is befuddlement as to the passage of time. All this leads us to stress certain important practical truths which should always be remembered.

1. Take note of the passing years. It is right and Christian to mark the change from 1995 to 1996. It is true that it is not exactly 1996 years since the Lord’s coming nor is there a command from God to keep track of how much time has elapsed since his coming. It is surely laudable, however, to write 1996 AD (not 1996 CE as some would have it). Better still The year of God’s grace 1996. We affirm that history is linear not circular, finite not infinite.

2. Take note of the passing months. Under the Law, the Israelites were encouraged not only to count the years (Jubilee, etc.) but months were also marked by new moon festivals and other seasonal feasts. We are no longer under such laws but it is good to see each new month as a mark of God’s favour and a fresh opportunity to serve him.

3. Remember the Lord’s Day. Again, although believers are not obliged to keep Old Testament Sabbaths, all orthodox Christians recognise the need to keep one day in seven special. We may disagree on details but we all recognise that the Lord’s Day is a special day to be kept, as far as we can, separate to God. It is sad to see many Christians today failing to make progress, largely because they fail to take advantage of this means of grace.

4. Live one day at a time. In Psalm 90 Moses prays that the Lord will teach us to number our days aright. Some people today live such chaotic lives they can hardly distinguish one day from another. Night and day merge in a single stream. Genesis 1 teaches us that there is a distinction between day and night. This is best observed by sleeping at night and working for God’s glory by day. That is not the regular privilege of some who may read this. We will all experience sleepless nights at some stage in life. However, let us not forget the norm. Further, take one day at a time and leave the next to worry about itself. Fill each day not with idle day dreaming but with living for the Lord. Daniel was a busy man but three times in the day were marked off for prayer to the Lord. The psalmist prayed seven times a day! Let us at least begin with prayer and the Word. The Jews divided their day into three watches of four hours; sunrise, the heat of the day and the cool of the day. We think more of morning, afternoon and evening. Organise each day carefully and use each part to God’s glory.

One period where a lot of time can be wasted for some is between 4 pm and 7 pm which may not fit firmly into afternoon or evening. Watch out! Plan ahead yet be flexible. Study the way our Lord conducted himself.

In conclusion, let me mention some more general principles.

• Be alert to the providence of God.
• Look to the Lord for guidance.
• Get your priorities right.
• Do not fall under the tyranny of the urgent.
• Be like Mary not like Martha and make the most of every opportunity.

Ecclesiastes 8:5,6 informs us that everything has its proper procedure. This is true of everything from painting a door, doing the laundry or shaving your face right through to preparing and preaching a sermon, comforting the bereaved and praying to God. Much time and effort will be saved when we learn and practice such procedures.

Finally, do not forget to do all you do in a dignified and beautiful way. Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe on his desert island not only kept a careful note of the date but also dressed for dinner. This was not eccentricity but an awareness of the God of peace and order. May we be aware of him too throughout this coming year.

Christmas Convictions

(This article was published in the December 2012 edition of Grace Magazine)

Christmas Convictions

Gary Brady

No not the results of the government's latest drink driving offensive but a look at one man's personal convictions about celebrating Christmas

I am sometimes involved in interviews at a theological college. We ask most of the questions but at the end they can ask what they want. I remember an occasion when one student asked about celebrating Christmas and Easter. He had come to the conviction this is something he did not want to be involved in and knowing that not all Christians take the same view he wanted to flag up his viewpoint. We assured him it would be no problem.

He is not alone in his convictions. I know of a minister with similar convictions who regularly goes on holiday at this time of year knowing that most of the church take a different approach to the season. The late Professor John Murray of Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, apparently used to really enjoy having the place to himself each December 25, which was for him an ordinary working day.

At the other extreme are Christians who keep Christmas as enthusiastically as anyone. Some will have a crib in their front room, pipe endless Christmas carols through the house and send cards with nativity scenes and texts. Some even talk of celebrating Christ's birthday and the idea of not being in church on Christmas day of all days makes them rather nervous.

What about you? Did you tut a little when you saw that the magazine theme was a Christmas one? Or were you pleased that the subject has been raised again? Whatever your reaction you need to hold firm convictions on this vexed subject but you need to hold them with grace, recognising that not all will hold the same convictions as you do.

What I want to do here is to set out my own convictions so that if you are undecided on the issue it may help you to come to firm convictions, which we all need, and if you are decided you will have a good opportunity to test your convictions and consider whether there might be need for change.

Conviction 1 The New Testament does not require believers to keep any particular festival

Talking about Jewish customs in Colossians 2:16 Paul says do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. In Romans 14 he says (6, 7a) One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord.

Obviously the Lord's Day is to be kept special as it is part of the moral law but with everything else, it is up to the individual. If you wish to celebrate Passover or Israeli independence or your birthday or Christmas or (to a limited extent) Ramadan for that matter, you are free to do so.

Conviction 2 Christmas or the midwinter festival as some want us to call it is a pagan festival

It is certainly possible that Jesus was born on December 25 or thereabouts but the truth is that we do not know, we cannot know and we do not need to know if that is so. It is true that large numbers of people celebrate his birthday at this time of the year but that is undeniably tied into the pre-Christian traditions that existed in communities in the northern hemisphere long before they heard the gospel.

Wherever Christians have gone, they have attempted to transform pagan customs into something more Christian. There is some evidence, for example, that Boniface the sixth century missionary to the Germans tried to stop pagan tree worship but still encouraged the custom of cutting down a fir tree and bringing it into the house in winter.

We may feel that pagan customs are better abandoned rather than adapted but the fact is that year by year we are confronted by pagan traditions, often with but increasingly without a Christian veneer, and we need to decide how to react. To do so we must try not to confuse what is allowable for a Christian to do with what it is necessary for him to do. It is allowable for a Christian to put a tree in his house and decorate it or eat plum pudding or wear a paper hat and blow a party puffer. It is allowable for him to celebrate Christ's birth with songs and readings and sermons any day of the year. None of these things are necessary for him to do.

Conviction 3 Christmas or the midwinter festival is a good idea for many

If you live in the northern hemisphere, winter is long and dreary. Splitting it up with a celebration in the middle makes good sense psychologically. If at the same time lots of people want to say it is a time to celebrate Christ's birth then rather than complaining about it, take advantage of the opportunity to talk about his birth, his life and his death too and how to come to him.

Having said that it is a pagan festival, if we are going to celebrate it then we must nevertheless be careful to celebrate it in a Christian way. Can we justify the amount we are spending albeit on other members of the family? Is slumping in front of the TV for more than a few hours a good idea? What about all that food and drink – is it right to so indulge? Are we just being swept along with it all and not thinking about how to glorify God? These are the sorts of questions to ask.

More positively, many will want to go further and not simply seek to shun the commercialised and pagan Christmas that is so common but really celebrate the fact of our Saviour's birth. When he saw Christmas trees Luther would famously speak about how Jesus the Light of the World has come into this dark world. That fact beats anything the world has to offer.

Conviction 4 No celebration should be allowed to unduly interfere with the Lord's Day

I do not know how you celebrate Christmas Day. For many people it includes a number of things that they would not normally do on the Lord's Day. It is important not to let anything interfere with keeping the Lord's Day, as far as possible and so when Christmas Day falls on a Sunday, as it will this year, it is wise for those who mark it to think ahead and consider how best they can handle possible conflicts. For many of us, it will be wisest if, this year at least, we do many of the things that we normally do on December 25 the day before or the day after.

Reading the New Testament Galatians

Do your best and all will be well. If the good outweighs the bad (if the love you make equals the love you take) God is happy. So some say. Despite some modern scholars’ doubts, Galatians, asserts the true Reformed doctrine of justification by faith and should be better known. Luther was greatly used to re-assert justification in the face of years of false teaching. He called Galatians ‘My letter … my Katherine’ (his wife). It gave him ample ammunition against Rome but the Council of Trent, in decrees never repealed, responded by re-affirming salvation by works and pronouncing anathemas on justification by faith alone.

Galatians?

Galatia can refer to a geographical region or the slightly larger Roman Province. Originally, Galatia meant northern Asia Minor, where Gauls settled in the third century BC, set up an independent kingdom and assimilated the surrounding culture. Following various political changes it came under Roman authority in 25 BC as part of a larger division of land to the south, the whole region being called Galatia. Older usage refers then to the northern part, Roman terminology to the southern cities of Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe.

To whom did Paul write?

1 Corinthians 16:1 says the churches of Galatia were among those asked to give to the Jerusalem poor. Paul also refers to Macedonia, Achaia and Asia (5, 15, 19), Roman Provinces. This suggests that the Galatian churches were in the south. Acts 16:6 speaks of travelling through the Phrygian and Galatian region (cf 18:23). This probably means the northern part of Galatia, in line with older usage.  

Date

Where the churches were does not greatly affect interpretation but it affects dating. If to northern churches, it is later. Paul visited these on his second missionary journey. If to southern churches, it is earlier. These were founded on the first journey. Probably the South Galatian theory is correct. It was perhaps just before Acts 15, a period when the problem of the Law’s place was becoming acute. Paul and Barnabas faced strong Jewish opposition as they evangelised South Galatia (Acts 13, 14). Peter’s visit to Antioch, mentioned in Galatians, may be placed shortly after Paul’s departure. The men that came from James and caused Peter to withdraw from the Gentile converts could be the men of Judea mentioned Acts 15:1. Perhaps Paul wrote Galatians just before Acts 15, anticipating the conclusions reached then. If later, it is surprising the decision is ignored. Galatians was probably written around 49 AD.

Background

What prompted it was infiltrating Judaisers teaching that to be right with God we must be circumcised and keep the Law. The Judaisers also undermined Paul’s authority denying his apostleship. Presumably they felt better able to represent apostolic teaching as they probably came from Judea, where the first apostles originated, an apparently plausible argument. zIt is important to note Paul’s response. There are few stronger words to a professing church in the New Testament. Not even Corinth, with all its chaos and immaturity, merited the dressing down given here. Paul does not give thanks for them or commend them. He says that if even an angel teaches another gospel, he is accursed (repeated for emphasis). He says they have deserted Christ for another gospel (1:6). In 4:19 he says he is again in labour until Christ is formed in them - it is as if they need to be born again, again! Until they re-embrace and reaffirm the truth their standing before God is uncertain and they are regarded as unbelievers, needing to hear the gospel all over again.

Outline

Paul defends his apostleship and affirms justification by faith alone with its consequent freedom from law and legalism. The theme is a defence of Christian liberty.

1. Introduction 1:1-9

The longest in Paul’s letters. Paul not only announces who is writing but also asserts his authority and the origin of his apostleship - not from men nor through the agency of man, but through Jesus Christ, and God the Father. There must be no mistake. He writes not as a brother but a divinely appointed Apostle. He establishes the ground of our liberty - Christ, who gave himself for our sins, to deliver us from this present evil age. Next comes the challenge to our liberty - another gospel. Not really a gospel, not good news, but something masquerading as one. From the start Paul delivers his verdict on those teaching something different - they are accursed, anathema. He is amazed at Galatian gullibility. They are accepting another gospel, one so different it is really something else. This is the letter’s thrust and determines its serious tone.

2. Paul defends his Apostleship 1:10-2:21

Before attacking this false gospel Paul establishes his credentials. His aim is not to please men or preach a popular message. He is Christ’s servant. He establishes his right to call himself an apostle and so to teach authoritatively. His gospel was revealed by God not by man. This establishes him as a true Apostle, one who received doctrines directly from God not through human intermediaries, even other apostles. In fact he once had to rebuke an apostle (Peter) when he temporarily went astray. Biographical argument. This label could sum up the section. Paul had an independent revelation of the gospel, independent of human teaching, the Judean churches, the Judaising teachers, the other apostles and any selfish, personal interest.

3. Paul affirms Justification by Faith 3:1-5:12

3:1-5

Theological argument. This begins by asserting their foolishness! Paul felt very strongly. He argues from their personal experience, how they came to Christ and received the Spirit: not by deeds but by faith.

3:6-9

Old Testament argument. Even Abraham was justified this way - by faith not deeds. This was a powerful argument as the Judaisers prided themselves on being descendants of Abraham. Paul includes the Gentiles in the covenant by stating (3:7) that those with faith like Abraham’s are his true sons.

3:10-14 The Law curses.

To avoid the curse the whole Law must be kept all the time. We have all incurred the Law’s curse. We are freed from it only by Christ who took the curse on himself.

3:15-18 Objection anticipated.

Does the fact the Law was given 430 years after the principle of faith was established with Abraham mean that Law has superseded faith as the means of being right with God? Paul argues that the Abrahamic covenant could not be made inoperative by the Law. He also points out that it was made with Abraham and his seed (singular), a single one of Abraham’s descendants, namely Jesus Christ, who came after the Law.

3:19-4:7 The Law’s purpose.

If not to justify or make righteous, what is it for? To define sin as transgression (going beyond a set mark). It shows sin for what it really is. Plaque disclosant tablets not toothpaste! To create a sense of guilt in man, to make us seek God. It was not intended to be lasting. It is there for spiritual infants, a tutor to teach us until mature - brought to faith in Christ. His work elevates us to the status of sons, not just children but those who have entered into their inheritance.

4:8-20 Back to the past.

Paul takes them back to their pagan past (4:8) asserting that what the Judaisers want is no different in principle - an elemental thing leading to slavery. It just advocated a different master. Paul feared his evangelistic efforts might prove fruitless (this is just after the first ever missionary journey!). He reminds them of their confidence in and affection for him when he arrived, in spite of his bodily affliction (poor eyesight?). They so loved him they would have plucked out their eyes to help.

4:21-31 Law and liberty contrasted.

Allegorising the historical characters Sarah and Hagar Paul contrasts Law and liberty. God promised Abraham and Sarah a son. None arriving, Abraham fathered one through Hagar. However, it was not Ishmael who inherited the promise but Isaac who was eventually born as promised. Ishmael typifies Law, Isaac grace. Ishmael persecuted Isaac as the legalists oppose Paul.

5:1-12 Appeal.

Paul calls on them to stand fast in the liberty of grace, not looking to the Law. He warns that accepting circumcision implies faith’s insufficiency to save and departs from the gospel. Some Judaisers said Paul still preached circumcision to Jews. If so, why is he persecuted? These false teachers, like yeast affect the whole lump. Echoing the imprecatory psalms, he wishes they would mutilate themselves!

4. New Life through the Spirit 5:13-6:10

Freedom in practice. This is no licence to do as we please. We are freed from the Law to display the fruit of the Spirit. Paul lists characteristics the Spirit produces in believers, things the Law, only describing holiness, cannot produce

5. Personal Conclusion 6:11-18

Paul writes in his own hand concluding that we must boast only in Christ and speaking of his sufferings for Christ.
This article first appeared in Grace Magazine

Reading the New Testament 2 Corinthians

Paul’s second letter to the Corinthians, according to Wesley, ‘beautifully displays’ Paul’s ‘tender affection toward the Corinthians’. It is, however, a relatively long and difficult book and is perhaps in danger of neglect. As the most personal of the letters of the great Apostle Paul, however, it is full of fascination. One writer says that while it is not easy to follow ‘it amply repays the effort required of the reader’. Bishop Paul Barnett has written of its ‘many inspiring texts and passages to the reader and teacher of God’s Word.’ ‘This letter’ he says ‘is a rich lode for the edification of God’s people’. He identifies seven areas of Christian doctrine where it ‘makes a magnificent and abiding contribution to our understanding of Christianity’. He highlights

God’s New Covenant faithfulness;

the New Covenant’s gracious and powerful character;

Christ’s person as Son of God, God’s image, Lord and Judge and sinless substitute through whom reconciliation comes;

the character of the true Christian minister (‘establishing true criteria for genuine Christian ministry is one of the major contributions of this letter’);

the gospel’s sharply defined qualities and power to bring rebel sinners under God’s rule;

the apostleship of Paul himself;

the character of Christian giving.

Letters to Corinth

In a previous article we wrote about Corinth and how Paul founded the church there in 50-52 AD. We described Corinth as wealthy and cosmopolitan, with a very varied population. A centre for sensuality and sport, it was renowned for morals that were loose even by the low standards of paganism. Luke describes the beginnings of the church in Acts 18.

Following its founding Paul moved on but wrote letters to them to help them with the many problems that subsequently arose. There was an early letter, referred to in 1 Corinthians 5:9, which we do not have (or need to have) but we do have 1 Corinthians, written, we suggested, in the Winter of 55 AD. It is possible that yet another letter from Paul to the Corinthians was written between what we call 1 and 2 Corinthians. In 2 Corinthians 2:4 Paul speaks of a previous letter written out of much affliction and anguish of heart ... with many tears to convince them of his love for them. Our 1 Corinthians does not seem to quite fit this description, so there may have been another letter not found in the New Testament. 2 Corinthians was written from Asia or Macedonia, probably in 55 or 56 AD, after a ‘painful’ second visit and before a third and final visit that followed.

2 Corinthians itself is written in a different way to Romans or 1 Corinthians. Unlike the first letter, this second is intended for all the churches of Achaia (see 1:1) and unlike 1 Corinthians it is not responding to various rumours and requests but is much more personal and autobiographical. It is not so much of a doctrinal treatise (although, as suggested, it is highly theological in places) more an opening up of the apostle’s person - his labours, hopes, desires and feelings. Perhaps as a result of this its structure is not so clear-cut. Paul wrote it to defend himself against some criticisms of his conduct that had arisen at Corinth, especially with regard to his intentions and motives, and also as a defence against the criticisms and slanders of his enemies, men who claimed to be ministers of Christ (11:23) but who were actually false brothers. The exact nature of these interlopers is one of the unsolved and perhaps unsolvable problems of New Testament introduction. It is Paul’s counter-attack that makes this such a wonderful treatment of the whole subject of the Christian ministry.

It has been noted that whereas in the first nine chapters the pronoun we is used more commonly than I, after that point the reverse is true. This suggests an increasingly more personal style. One of the key words in the letter is comfort and its cognates.

Possible outline

Theme: Paul’s vindication of himself and his ministry

1. Greeting 1:1-2

2. Explanation of His Personal Conduct 1:3-2:13 He speaks of his own suffering and difficulties, and that he was not vacillating or being unreliable when he did not come to visit them again: he did not want to cause them further sorrow.

3. Defence of His Ministry 2:14-7:4 The Nature of the Ministry 2:14-3:18 He is a servant of Christ, of the glorious ministry of life The Sincerity of the Ministry 4:1-6 He does not use hidden ways and tricks. Deceitfulness is a method the devil uses to blind people. The Perseverance of the Ministry 4:7-15 Despite many trials, he still continues The Prospect of the Ministry 4:16-5:10 He works in the light of eternity: the glory and renewal that is to come. The Motives of the Ministry 5:11-19 The fear of God and the love of Christ The Example of the Ministry 5:20-6:10 He lives and works as an ambassador for Christ and suffers many things in order to fulfil his calling The Appeal of the Ministry 6:11-7:4 He pleads with them to turn from worldliness and sin and to have a place for him in their hearts

4. Comment on the Effects of the Letter 7:5-15 Probably referring to the lost intermediate letter, and that now they are zealously and sincerely repentant

5. The Grace of Giving 8:1-9:15 Paul is making a collection for the saints in Jerusalem and urges the Corinthians to contribute generously to this as the churches in Macedonia were doing

6. Personal Defence 10:1-12:13 He defends his apostleship and labours in the face of criticism and undermining by false apostles

7. Preparation for His Visit 12:14-13:10

8. Concluding Greeting 13:11-14

Reading the New Testament 1 Corinthians

Ancient Corinth stood on the narrow neck of land connecting the mainland to the Peloponessus. In Paul’s day it was an important trading centre. Merchants sending goods to Italy preferred transferring cargo from Cenchrea, east of Corinth, across land to the western port of Lechaeum, rather than taking the hazardous journey round the southern tip of the Peloponessus. The Romans destroyed the city BC 146, but a hundred years later rebuilt and colonised it under Julius Caesar. The capital of the senatorial province of Achaia, the governing proconsul (Gallio in Paul’s day, Acts 18:12) resided there.

Corinth was wealthy and cosmopolitan, with a mixture of Jews, Romans, Greeks; traders, sailors, skilled workers and the poor. It saw wealth and poverty and all extremes of human life. Jews came to trade; Romans were there on official business or were descendants of the original colonists; Greeks gravitated there from the countryside. Corinth was a centre for sensuality and sport, and was renowned for morals that were loose even by the low standards of paganism. To Corinthianise was a term for the lowest kind of life. At one time, its Temple of Aphrodite had a thousand priestesses who were sacred prostitutes.

Background

Paul arrived from Athens (45 miles east) in Autumn, 51 AD. Gallio’s proconsulship is thought to have begun mid-52. Paul was there a year and a half, including many days after appearing before Gallio so he probably left the city in Spring, 53 AD. He arrived without his companions, Silas and Timothy, but soon met Aquila and Priscilla. Previously living in Rome, they were forced to leave when Claudius ordered all Jews to depart in 50 AD. Whether they were converted before leaving Rome or in Corinth is uncertain. They shared with Paul a common trade - tent-making. They worked together throughout Paul’s early days.

Paul preached first at the synagogue and, as was his custom, reasoned with the Jews from the Scriptures concerning the Christ they foretell. When Silas and Timothy arrived from Macedonia, he seems to have devoted himself solely to preaching. Maybe they brought funds from the Macedonians (cf Philippians 4:15, 16). As so often, the Jews’ reaction was hostile (Acts 18:6) so Paul determined to turn to the Gentiles. His centre of operations did not move far - just next door to the home of Titius Justus, a proselyte. The Lord blessed Paul’s preaching. Crispus, the synagogue leader, was converted and many others.

Opposition continued despite the blessing but (Acts 18:9, 10) the Lord spoke to Paul one night, encouraging him not to be afraid but to keep preaching. This suggests that he was in need of encouragement. However, there is nothing to link this with the response he had met with in Athens nor to suggest that he altered his strategy for Corinth.

An indication of this continued opposition comes with the Jews dragging Paul before Gallio, accusing Paul of persuading men to worship God contrary to the Law. The Proconsul was not about to step into a theological controversy outside his expertise and he threw out the case, telling them to settle it themselves. We read (Acts 18:17) that they all took hold of Sosthenes, the leader of the synagogue, and beat him in front of the judgement seat. It is unclear who was involved. Some suggest a crowd of Gentile onlookers did it because the Jews were causing trouble but perhaps it was some of the Jews themselves, as their leader had not put the case strongly enough. Sosthenes had obviously succeeded the converted Crispus as synagogue leader but it appears he was also converted as his name appears with Paul’s at the head of 1 Corinthians.

While Paul was later across the Aegean Sea in Ephesus he corresponded with Corinth. The church was unstable and immature and had many problems. The members were mostly Gentile with a pagan background not an Old Testament one. They lacked the moral principles such exposure would have given.

After Paul’s departure Apollos came to Corinth. He was an accomplished speaker and debater, something that the Greek culture of Corinth would appreciate. Peter also may have visited, though we have no details. Paul refers to him and his itinerant preaching in Chapter 9. We know from the letter that rival factions were lining up behind these notable preachers: Apollos, Peter and Paul. Others claimed to be just of Christ.

Paul wrote a letter to Corinth before 1 Corinthians. In 5:9 Paul refers to it, saying that he had told them not to associate with immoral people. They misunderstood his point and he had to make clear that he was concerned about the greatly immoral atmosphere of the city and how this would affect the believers. He was not advocating withdrawal from society but discipline within the church. We do not have this original letter, so we cannot know its contents. Some speculate that it was kept at Corinth and that parts of both our Corinthian letters contain pieces of that original letter (including 6:12-20, 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1). There is no evidence to support this conjecture.

It is clear that the lost letter produced an unsatisfactory response and there was still confusion in the church. Apollos was no longer at Corinth and was probably back in Ephesus with Paul. Cf 16:12. Paul was urging him to revisit Corinth. There is no indication that Peter was in Corinth. Paul would surely have mentioned him if he was. The church seems to have lacked strong leadership at this time. News of the church had reached Paul from members of Chloe’s household, possibly slaves in Ephesus on business. Also three members of the church, Stephanus, Fortunatus and Achaicus, had come to Paul from the city (16:17). They seem to have brought him a gift and a letter containing questions the church wanted Paul to settle.

Paul’s response to the questions and the rumours he had heard, was to write 1 Corinthians. It must have been written in the latter part of his stay in Ephesus, as he has already made plans to leave for Macedonia and so may come to them soon (16:5-7). It may have been written in Winter, 55 AD, as he speaks of staying on until Pentecost, because of the blessing he is seeing.

A possible outline

1 Corinthians is one of the most varied of Paul’s letters in content and style. Many diverse topics needed dealing with and Paul uses all kinds of literary devices to make his points - logical reasoning, sarcasm, pleading, scolding, poetry, narrative and exposition. Some see in this the kind of verbal style he would have used to address the elders in person! Despite the wide variety of topics in the letter, a theme runs through it - how to live in the world in light of the cross. The matters dealt with are relevant to today. In the west, many issues dealt with are increasingly familiar as society grows more pagan.

Theme: The application of the cross

1. Salutation 1:1-9

2. Reply to Report from Chloe’s Household 1:10-6:20

 Party Strife 1:10-3:23

 Defence of Paul’s Ministry 4:1-21

 Criticism of Immorality 5:1-13

 Criticism of Lawsuits 6:1-11

 Reply to Libertarianism 6:12-20

3. Reply to Questions in Their Letter 7:1-16:9

 Marriage 7:1-24

 The Unmarried 7:25-40

 Things Sacrificed to Idols 8:1-11:1

Evaluated by considering
  the idol 8:1-13
  freedom 9:1-27

  God 10:1-22

  others 10:23-11:1

 Problems of the Conduct of Worship 11:2-34

  Head coverings 11:2-16

  Lord’s Supper 11:17-34

 Spiritual Gifts 12:1-14:40

 Resurrection of the Body 15:1-58

 The Collection 16:1-
4. Closing Greetings 16:10-24

The letter’s structure is determined by the order the topics were mentioned to Paul by Chloe’s household and in the letter brought by the visitors from Corinth. He deals with the news he has heard first (Chapters 1-6) then says Now concerning the things about which you wrote ... (7:1). He subsequently divides the questions up by starting each new section with Now concerning .... (7:25, 8:1, 12:1, 16:1).

The letter gives us an insight into the problems experienced by a young church, formed in a pagan environment. It was taken to Corinth by Timothy, or at least he would follow soon afterward (16:10). Paul commends him to the church, urging them not to despise him (a reference either to his youth or characteristic timidity). Paul had encouraged Apollos to go. He was reluctant, perhaps fearing he would harden divisions. The letter did not solve all the problems. The divisions and opposition to Paul continued, as is seen in 2 Corinthians.

Reading the New Testament Romans

Paul’s longest letter (that’s why it’s first), that to the Romans, has been called by Irving Jensen ‘Paul’s masterpiece’. Luther called it ‘the chief part of the New Testament … the purest gospel’. Calvin said it opens the door ‘to all the most profound treasures of Scripture’. Coleridge called it ‘the most profound book in existence’. Down the years Christians from many different backgrounds have greatly valued it.

The background

The traditional view is that Paul wrote the letter in 56 or 57 AD, at the end of his third missionary journey, probably while at Corinth, although he may have written from Philippi before sailing for Troas. He was planning to return to Jerusalem with the collection made in Macedonia and Achaia (15:25, 26) then go on to Spain, visiting Rome en route (15:24). The letter was probably carried by Phoebe (16:1), a servant (deaconess?) in the church at Cenchrea. The last chapter of the letter shows that Paul had many friends in Rome. He sends many greetings to people known to him. He says he had often planned to visit (1:13, 15:22) but had been hindered from doing so on each occasion. When Paul eventually reached Rome, it was not as a freeman but as a prisoner.

The church at Rome was probably not very large, and consisted mainly of Gentiles. Paul speaks of them as Gentiles in 1:13. The reason for thinking this is that the church had not made any great impact on the Jewish population there. From the end of Acts we learn that there were some Jews at Rome, who must have come to the city after the expulsion of Jews by Claudius in 50 AD (this would now have been in the time of Nero, perhaps 13 years later.) The Jews in Rome had not heard of Paul from their countrymen in Judea, nor it seems did they know much about the gospel, though they had heard of it. They had a more open attitude than Paul had encountered elsewhere and Acts 28:21, 22 tells us that they wanted to hear more. All this suggests that the existing church was not prominent or influential in the city. 

We do not know anything about the origin of the church at Rome. There were visitors from Rome in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10) who may have been converted and returned to the city with the gospel. Also, Priscilla and Aquila had come from Rome and according to 16:3 had returned. Certainly they would have been involved in the nurture of the church, even if not in its founding. The New Testament certainly makes no suggestion that Peter was involved in establishing the church. It is more likely that the church was started spontaneously by converts who settled there from other parts of the world, with no direct apostolic involvement.

Perhaps the best way to understand the history is to assume a largely Jewish membership at first. Then when Claudius expelled the Jews it changed and became largely Gentile. When Jews eventually returned to Rome and to the church there were some cultural tensions. This certainly fits in with the opening chapters and with Chapters 14 and 15. It may illuminate Chapters 9-11 too. The book thus has a lot to say to established churches today that receive an influx of unchurched converts.

Paul was interested in this church for a number of reasons. He wanted to see the capital of the empire, and possibly make the church there a centre of outreach to other parts of Italy and maybe the rest of the empire. As we have seen, he wanted to go as far as Spain, which was the western edge of the known world at that time. We can also see from the character of the letter that he was concerned to give thorough and systematic instruction to the church there. Unlike 1 Corinthians or Galatians, this letter is less concerned with correcting errors and dealing with problems and more with simply teaching the truth. While not covering every area of Christian doctrine, it is the fullest account of Christian teaching in the New Testament, with the possible exception of Ephesians. 

The central theme is the gospel itself, the revelation of the righteousness of God in providing for the salvation of sinners. It is particularly addressed to Gentiles, reflecting the composition of the church at Rome. Paul speaks of himself as the Apostle to the Gentiles (1:5) and in Chapter 1 outlines the religious history of the Gentile world apart from the gospel. He speaks of the gospel as being for Gentiles also (3:29) and emphasises that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in the way of salvation. Key words or phrases include law, righteousness, faith, sin, death, flesh, impute (credit), in Christ, Spirit. Leschert draws attention to one characteristic little phrase Paul uses ten times in this letter – May it never be! (God forbid! the AV has). See 3:3, 5, 31; 6:1, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11.

A possible outline Theme: Salvation by grace alone. As is often the pattern in his letters, Paul begins with doctrine (to the end of Chapter 11) and then comes to his application later.

1. Introduction 1:1-17 Salutation, author, destination, greeting 1:1-7 Occasion of writing 1:8-15 Theme stated 1:16-17

2. The Need of Divine Righteousness 1:18-3:20

The Decline of the Gentile World 1:18-32

All Are Without Excuse 2:1-16

The Need of the Jews 2:17-3:8

The Universal Condemnation 3:9-20

3. Justification By Faith Established 3:21-8:39

Justification Explained 3:21-31

Justification Illustrated from the OT 4:1-28

The Consequences of Justification 5:1-21

Objections to Justification Anticipated 6:1-7:25

The Security of the Justified 8:1-39

4. Justification By Faith and Israel’s History 9:1-11:36

God’s Absolute Sovereignty 9:1-29

Jewish Responsibility 9:30-10:21

The Merciful Purposes of God 11:1-36

5. Practical Consequences of Justification 12:1-15:13

Living Before God 12:1, 2

Living in the Church 12:3-16

Living Among Enemies 12:17-21

Living as a Citizen 13:1-14

Living in Love and Liberty 14:1-15:13

6. Personal Matters and Closing Doxology 15:14-16:21

Christian doctrine for all

It is interesting to note the way this letter was so important in the conversions of three of the most significant men in Christian history – namely Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther and John Wesley. No wonder Dale Leschert calls it ‘one of the most influential letters in all of history’. The letter has also been very significant for the formulation of Christian doctrine. John Stott calls it ‘the fullest, plainest and grandest statement of the gospel in the New Testament’. Many theological terms we use are derived chiefly from this letter, eg justification, imputation, adoption, sanctification. The letter’s structure has greatly influenced Christian thought. However, it is a book, as F F Bruce notes, for ‘ordinary men and women’, people like you and me. Luther wanted every Christian to know it off by heart and make it ‘the daily bread of the soul’. As F F Bruce wrote, ‘there is no telling what may happen when people begin to study the letter to the Romans’. If you have never made serious study of the book, may I urge you to try. You will find Stuart Olyott’s little book The gospel as it really it (in Evangelical Press’s Welwyn series) a great help.

Originally published in Grace Magazine

Reading the New Testament Acts

It is clear from what we said in a previous article on the third Gospel that Acts was written by Luke, the beloved doctor. Acts or more fully Acts of the Apostles could be called, it has been suggested, Acts of the Holy Spirit. There is certainly an emphasis on the Spirit, beginning with the outpouring of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. However, the book’s opening gives us a clue to a better title. Acts is clearly the second part of a two-part work. The opening verse refers to a former account of all that Jesus began to do and teach. The implication is that Acts tells us what Jesus continued to do and teach to the early church by the Spirit through the Apostles.

Content

Acts begins where the Gospel leaves off, and continues the account of God revealing himself in mercy and grace, not just to Jews but to the whole world. We can divide the book into sections:

1. Introduction 1:1-11

2. Origin of the church: Jerusalem 1:12-8:3

3. Transition period: Samaria 8:4-11:18

4. Expansion to Gentiles, Paul’s mission: Antioch and the Empire 11:19-21:16

5. Imprisonment and defence of Paul: Caesarea and Rome 21:17-28:31

Acts is constructed logically around the geographical development given in Acts 1:8. The Lord says to the Apostles You shall be witnesses to me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. After the introduction Luke deals with events concerning the Jerusalem church and its growth. Then we get a glimpse into the expansion into Samaria and the coastal plain of Palestine to Caesarea. Further sections show the gospel spreading throughout the empire, into the cities of the Mediterranean world and on to the capital, Rome. As he records the expansion, Luke notes the churches’ spiritual and numerical growth - 2:47, 5:14, 6:7, 9:31, 12:24, 16:5, 19:20.

Characters and preaching

Acts can also be looked at from the point of view of the characters the Lord used.

1-5 Peter

6, 7 Stephen

8-12 Barnabas, Philip, Saul of Tarsus

13-28 Paul

Another characteristic is the record of the preaching of the early church. Acts could be called The Preaching of the Apostles as it records a number of sermons or speeches mostly by Peter and Paul. 

Peter’s speeches

Pentecost 2:14-39

In the Temple precincts 3:12-26

Defence to Sanhedrin 4:8-12,   5:29-32

To Cornelius and household 10:34-43

Paul’s speeches

Synagogue, Pisidian Antioch 13:16-41

Lystra 14:15-17

Thessalonica 17:2-3

Athens 17:22-31

Defence, Jerusalem 22:1-21

Defence before Felix 24:10-21

Defence before Festus and Agrippa 26:2-23

Comparisons have been drawn between Peter and Paul

They were both Apostles; Peter to Jews, Paul to Gentiles

As noted, preachers, whose sermons are recorded

Able to miraculously heal. Both healed lame men (Peter, 3:1-10; Paul, 14:8-10)

Instrumental in bringing miraculous personal judgement (Peter, Ananias and Sapphira struck dead, 5:1-11; Paul, Elymas struck blind, 13:6-11)

Freed from prison by divine intervention (Peter - Jerusalem, 12:1-11; Paul - Philippi, 16:19-30)

Men who stressed the Spirit’s work and Christ’s resurrection

Though Paul went to Gentiles and Peter to Jews, they were not exclusivist. Peter pioneered the gospel to the Gentiles as he spoke to Cornelius. Paul was willing to preach to his fellow-countrymen and had a great burden for them (see Romans 10). 

Historicity and aim

Acts’ historical reliability has been challenged at times, but never successfully. There are difficulties in fitting its chronology with that of the epistles, and some of Luke’s historical detail cannot be confirmed from outside sources. Many details have been confirmed, however, by the findings of archaeology and palaeography.

Acts is not an exhaustive account of the church’s spread. Luke, a careful historian, does not give us a comprehensive account of all that happened. His interest is in the spread from Jews to Gentiles, events that he himself witnessed firsthand, as we see from the we sections. He records nothing of the gospel’s spread southward or eastward but deals with its spread northward and westward into Greece and Rome. There were Christians in Egypt and Syria from early days. How this happened is not recorded. There were believers in Damascus before Paul’s conversion, but no account of this is given. When we consider that we hear nothing of the activities of most Apostles, we realise that much early church history remains hidden. The reasons for this limitation of the scope of Acts probably include the fact that Luke was writing mainly about events he knew personally or could find out from Paul, with whom he was closely associated. He could use these events more fully to illustrate his theme of the gospel’s expansion and its relevance to all mankind, Jew and Gentile alike. He was also instructing an individual, Theophilus, in the certainty of the gospel. The fact that this man was probably a Roman official led him to centre his interest on the spread of the gospel toward Rome, rather than dealing with the church’s growth in other geographical directions.

Period and interest

The chronological period covered by Acts is 30-60 AD, from the Ascension to Paul’s imprisonment in Rome. There are certain events that Luke records whose dates can be fixed independently.

Famine under Claudius 11:28 44-48 AD

Death Herod Agrippa I 12:20-23 44 AD (Spring)

Proconsulship Sergius Paulus 13:7 Before 51 AD

Expulsion of Jews from Rome 18:2 49 AD (probably)

Proconsulship Gallio 18:12 52, 53 AD

Proconsulship Felix 23:26, 24:27 52-56 AD

Accession Festus 24:27 57-60 AD

Luke’s interest was not primarily in a chronology of the period, though he paid more attention to these matters than most New Testament writers. Rather he charts for us the gradual decline in prominence of Jewish Christianity and the growth of faith among the Gentiles. At the book’s opening the atmosphere is very Jewish. The Apostles ask the Lord about the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel. The crowd who hear Peter’s Pentecost sermon is mainly Jewish. Peter speaks to the men of Israel (2:22). The church at Jerusalem was mainly Jewish, although there were two groups in the church, natives of Palestine and Hellenistic Jews of the Dispersion - which caused tensions over the distribution of food (see Acts 6).

At first, the church was seen as a sect within Judaism, The Way (9:2) or the sect of the Nazarenes (24:5). It was Stephen’s preaching that stirred up a violent reaction from the Jewish authorities and led to the church being scattered and the evangelisation of Samaria, Antioch and the Gentile world. The transition period (8:4-11:18) is not covered in detail, but it is clear that the gospel began to make inroads among the Gentiles. Here is the conversion of the Ethiopian and of Cornelius, both probably Gentile proselytes. We also have the positive Samaritan response to Philip’s preaching. These events mark a move away from the expectation of a Messianic Kingdom toward the establishment of the church as we know it.

The latter part, dealing with the mission to the Gentiles, begins with the establishment of a church in Antioch, where the break with Judaism seems to have first become evident. Believers were no longer seen as a sect within Judaism but were called Christians, a separate and distinct group with a different faith. It has been suggested that Acts was written with an apologetic intention. The relationship between the gospel, the Christian church it produced and the Roman government is traced from its origin to Paul’s Roman imprisonment.

The author was a close friend of Paul and may have intended to show that Paul’s gospel was no threat to the Empire. It was a spiritual not a political movement. One writer (J Ironside Still) advanced the theory that Acts was written to help Paul’s defence before Caesar. Perhaps Theophilus still had suspicions about the new movement, in view of the attitude of both Jews and Gentile, so Luke writes to give him certainty about what he had heard. Obviously that certainty was needed. Whatever is behind the book’s writing, Luke demonstrates that God’s supernatural revelation has come to all mankind, not just to the Jews.

This article originally appeared in Grace Magazine

Reading the New Testament John's Gospel

The fourth Gospel stands apart. It looks at the life and ministry of Christ but with a structure and style very different from the other Gospels, one that complements and does not contradict the others.

Author

Because of its uniqueness, its historical accuracy has been questioned. This raises the question of authorship and the purpose for writing.

External evidence Tradition states that it was written by the last surviving apostle, John, in his latter years at Ephesus. The earliest evidence of its existence is found in Eusebius. He quotes Papias referring to John the Apostle and John the Elder. Eusebius assumes there were two men named John in Ephesus at the same time. There were certainly two tombs there, which may have influenced him. However, he probably misunderstood. Papias simply meant John was the last of the Twelve and by then an old man. In 1 and 2 John he calls himself the elder. Eusebius’s distinctions between apostles and elders did not exist in Papias’s day. Eusebius also did not believe John wrote Revelation. There is no reason to think the fourth Gospel was written by an unknown elder. All the early church fathers from Irenaeus on back up the tradition that John son of Zebedee wrote it. Irenaeus knew Polycarp, a contemporary of Papias, who knew John. The tradition is long established. Even C H Dodd, who rejected John’s authorship, was unaware of any good external evidence for his view.

Internal evidence The content supports this view. The writer is Jewish, probably used to thinking in Aramaic and using Greek as a second language. Aramaic words appear and are translated and explained. The style is typically Hebrew in structure. The writer understood and quotes from the Old Testament and is familiar with Jewish customs and festivals. References to festivals help give a chronological framework. For instance, Passover - 2:23, 6:4, (5:1?), 13:1. He refers to Jewish expectations of Messiah and was acquainted with small details of Jewish custom (Chapters 2, 3, 11). He had been resident in Palestine and describes the geography well. He implies that he was an eye-witness of many events. See 1:14, 19:35.

The final internal clue comes from his self-references - The disciple whom Jesus loved (13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7,20), the other disciple (18:15-16, 20:2, 21:2) and the disciple about whom a rumour spread that he would not die (21:20-25). Only one close associate of the Lord fits the bill. The absence of the name ‘John the son of Zebedee’ confirms it.

The style and vocabulary is similar to John’s letters. We also have the distinctive emphasis on love found in the letters also in the Gospel.

John’s name is mentioned 35 times in the New Testament, twice as often as those of the other Gospel writers combined. He was obviously a significant person. Son of Zebedee and Salome, he was the apostle James’s brother. His father must have been a successful Galilee fisherman. We know he employed servants in the business as well as his sons. Salome was probably sister to Jesus’s mother Mary. John 19:25 says Mary’s sister was among the group of women at the cross. By comparing lists in the other Gospels it seems likely that Mary and Salome were sisters. So John was Jesus’s cousin. If so, significantly, John makes nothing of it. John tells us in the Gospel that he was a disciple of the Baptist, who pointed out Christ as the Lamb of God. He followed the Lord as he first set out preaching in Galilee, and was chosen one of the Twelve. He belonged to the inner circle with Peter and James. These three went alone with the Lord at times. It is thought by many that John was the disciple who followed the Lord, after his arrest, into the High Priest’s house and that he was known to the High Priest’s family. He witnessed the crucifixion and went to see the empty tomb. He was commissioned, with the others as an Apostle and became one of the pillars of the church. Tradition says he became an elder in Ephesus and was exiled to the Aegean island of Patmos by Domitian, where he received the Revelation. Tradition also says that he was permitted to return to Ephesus by Nerva, in AD 96 and remained there until his death sometime between 98 and 117. We have referred to a characteristic note in his writing that have led him to be called the Apostle of Love. 

An attractive legend says that in old age, too frail to walk he was carried to the meeting place in Ephesus. All he could say in his extreme weakness was Little children, love one another. At one time he was given the name Son of Thunder along with his brother, for wanting to call down fire from heaven. He was a man who had been transformed by God’s grace.

Date and place of writing

When we attempt to fix a date for composition, we find a diversity of views among liberal scholars. Some date it as early as AD 40, others as late as 140-170, too late to have been John’s work. Conservative writers consider that it was written after the Synoptics sometime between 85 and 95 from Ephesus. A fragment of papyrus manuscript in the John Rylands Library at Manchester, known as the Rylands Fragment, or P52 contains about five verses of the Gospel. It has been dated around AD 125-135. This shows that the Gospel was probably in circulation before the 2nd Century began. 1Purpose It was probably written because the church had by that time reached a certain maturity, and needed further teaching on the nature of faith in Christ. It seems to have been written for Gentiles. John states the purpose of his writing toward the end, in 20:30. He wrote to convince his readers of Christ’s deity and humanity. We can see from his letters that he was living in a time when the incarnation was under attack, possibly from early forms of Gnosticism. He shows that the Lord was not just an appearance of deity, like an Old Testament theophany. These were appearances for a brief time not incarnations for a lifetime. Gnostics were happy to view Christ as a manifestation of God only but such an appearance cannot make true atonement for sins. John seeks to show The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us having first established what he means by The Word - the eternal God, one who was with God and was God (an obvious Trinitarian reference) - one who possessed the divine nature, yet was face to face with God - the same, yet distinct. John’s second purpose came from his desire for this knowledge of the truth to lead to faith and eternal life, believing, you might have life through his name. The book is theological, defending what theologians now call the hypostatic union - two natures, human and divine, in one person. It is also evangelistic - an invitation to faith in Christ. 1Distinctive features The most selective Gospel, over 90% is not parallelled elsewhere. If our dating is accurate and John was last to write, then he would probably have had access to the other Gospels. It is surprising that he makes so little use of their material and has so much that is unique. His purpose was not to write a comprehensive and exhaustive biography but to present the Lord in his incarnate deity in order to bring about faith. He selected materials suitable to that end. He leaves out all the parables but relates more direct discourses. Many sermons and discourses are found only in John. There are 27 interviews or conversations between the Lord and others, most exclusive to John. Without John we would not have the lengthy and significant teaching from the Upper Room or details of the prayer in Gethsemane. John does not record the sermon in Matthew 24-25 and the other Synoptics. It may be that this is because he wrote after AD 70.

The sections of teaching from the Lord deal more with who he is than with ethical direction and instruction. There is a greater emphasis on personal conversations and relationships between the Lord and individuals rather than on portraying him with the crowds. It is a very much more theological Gospel, dealing with Christ’s Person and faith’s nature.

Key words: signs, believe, life. Signs is used to refer to miracles. The use of sign indicates something about their purpose. John says the Lord did many other things that he did not record. He chose just eight sign-miracles to demonstrate his point, six of them unique to John. Interestingly, there are no accounts of demons being cast out. The first seven miracles were performed during his ministry before the crucifixion, the last in the period after the resurrection before the ascension. Around these sign-miracles John builds a literary framework of sermons, conversations and comments. In some cases the miracle recorded gives the background to the sermon that follows, as with the feeding of the 5000, which leads to the discourse on the Bread of Life. In other cases the sermon was illustrated by the miracle, as when the Lord speaks of being the Light of the World as he gives sight to the blind man. The word believe is used 98 times, usually translated believe, though sometimes commit or trust. It means more than just intellectual assent. It stands for the trust of the entire person to the Lord. The verb’s tense in many places where it is used implies continuous belief, involving progress, and therefore has reference to the whole of the Christian life, not just the initial entering into commitment and faith. John defines belief as receiving Christ. The third key word life implies all that the believer receives from the Lord, the highest and greatest experience we can know. The Lord said in his prayer (17:3) This is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. In John’s terminology, life is not just the source of our existence on earth or an inner animal force but the nature we have, an interaction with our Maker.

Of all the Evangelists, John places greatest emphasis on Christ’s deity, mainly from the Lord’s own assertions about himself. Debating with the Jews he says before Abraham was, I am (8:58). They take up stones to kill him because they clearly understand him to be asserting eternal deity. Jesus is using the name God revealed to Moses at the Burning Bush. He amplifies its meaning with the famous seven I am sayings.

He made other statements in which he claimed to be God. I and my Father are One (10:30), He that has seen me has seen the Father (14:9). Clearly no sane and honest man, especially a Jew, would make such statements if they were not true. 

Structure

When we try to outline the Gospel it is clear that the book has a prologue (1:1-14/18) and an epilogue (21:1-25). What lies between falls neatly into two parts, public and private ministry. These have sometimes been designated ‘The Book of Signs’ and the ‘Book of Glory’ or ‘The Passion’. Others reject this approach. One scholar argues that 10:22-29 is the structural summit and everything is grouped around that. Others propose more elaborate schemes. There is a general agreement that the book is highly unified and tightly structured. The difficulty is what to make of that fact. For example, there is an inclusio referring to Cana in 2:1 and 4:54 but it is unlikely that there is anything theologically significant about Cana itself.

This article first appeared in Grace Magazine

Reading the New Testament Luke's Gospel

As author of both the third Gospel and Acts, Luke is author of more than half the New Testament. He is, it would seem, the Bible’s only Gentile writer. We know little about his background but he was a medical doctor by training, probably from Syrian Antioch where he no doubt heard the gospel and became a fellow worker of the Apostle Paul. He travelled with Paul and seems to have ministered in the church in Philippi that Paul founded. He was possibly Titus’s brother but we cannot know for sure. There is a tradition that as well as being a doctor, he was an artist. There is no certainty. He certainly was an artistic writer. His vocabulary is rich and varied, with many beautiful word-pictures. Books in the Bible do not always have an explanatory introduction but Luke’s does. He begins with a helpful explanation of what he is writing and why. We can see these as five arguments for paying close attention to what Luke has to say. Because he is …

Dealing with fulfilled prophecy

He begins, Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled among us …. It would seem that in the earliest days little was written down about Jesus’s ministry, partly because this was a less literate culture; partly because everyone knew about what had happened as it was in living memory. There may also have been a sense that as Jesus would soon return there was no need to write. As the years passed, however, and as people like Luke, who never knew Jesus while on earth, were converted, several began to think about writing things down. Luke says many had undertaken to draw up an account. This includes perhaps Mark and Matthew and other attempts unknown to us or incorporated in Luke. Luke refers to the things he has in mind as the things that have been fulfilled among us. What he writes about then is not certain things from the past or even interesting things from the past but things that fulfilled prophecy. This is history but not just any history. It is the fulfilment of prophecy.

Accurate

It is based on first hand accounts of what happened by servants of the Word. Luke himself was not an eye witness of the events he describes. Rather, he has recorded what eye witnesses saw. Other accounts have concentrated on what Luke says was handed down to us by those who from the first were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Not being an eye witness may seem a disadvantage at first but it means to say that Luke is in the position that we are – of being removed from the events. However, what was written and what Luke includes here is based on eye witness accounts and is completely reliable and trustworthy. Quite apart from the fact that this is Scripture and so utterly trustworthy anyway we can say that this is an accurately written account. You can trust it implicitly.

Well researched

It is the result of careful and thorough investigation. Luke goes on to explain how he felt that he could write a reliable account, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning. To write as he did, Luke engaged in meticulous, wide ranging research. He was both careful and thorough in his examination of the subject, going right back to the beginnings of the story. This comes out in many places. At times archaeologists and others have accused Luke of inaccuracy but again and again his research has been shown to be correct. He is historically accurate and entirely reliable. He may not always be precise according to modern criteria but according to the standards of the time, he was exceptionally precise. This guarantee of accuracy should encourage our confidence in what is written.

Orderly

Luke continues, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus. We do not know who Theophilus might have been or if he was converted. He was probably a Roman official or an aristocrat (most excellent). Luke has written for him, whoever he was, an orderly account. It attempts to cover the whole story from beginning to end and that in an ordered (usually although not always chronological) manner. Luke does not throw bits and bobs at us but attempts to give us a methodical, coherent presentation that sets out the basic series of events in a way that is true to history and that will impress itself on our minds. Suited to strengthen faith.

It is intended to enable readers to know the certainty of the things they have been taught. Luke says that he has written so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. Theophilus had clearly had some Christian teaching but he had his questions, his doubts. Luke’s purpose is to deal with them.

Outline

Following the introduction in 1:1-4, we have

1. 3:1-4:13 The introduction of the Son of Man

2. 4:14-9:50 The ministration of the Son of Man

3. 9:51-18:30 The mission of the Son of Man

4. 18:31-23:56 The passion of the Son of Man

5. 24:1-53 The resurrection of the Son of Man

Distinctives

Bearing in mind what has been said, it seems that Luke was written around 60 AD or shortly before. By then, Luke would have been a believer around 10 years, and would have had opportunity to carry out the researches he mentions, probably while Paul was in prison at Caesarea. From there he could easily have travelled around Palestine to meet those who had witnessed the events he was to record. Among the distinctive features of Luke are these

The use of songs or poems of praise in the early chapters. 

The careful use of historical dating to set the scene.

Extensive treatment of Christ’s life, going from before his birth and beyond his resurrection.

If Matthew portrays Christ as the Promised King and Mark shows the Lord to be the Servant, Luke presents him as the perfect man, the Son of Man. In that sense Luke can be said to be writing for the human race in general, without distinction.

Another emphasis is doctrine. This is no surprise when we consider that he travelled with Paul and ministered as a pastor and evangelist.

Salvation is a further prominent theme. In 19:10 there is a key phrase, The Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost.

Some of the parables (see Chapter 15) illustrate the meaning of salvation.

He uses the word justify seven times in his two volumes.

The doctrine of the Holy Spirit is prominent. We find more references to the Spirit in Luke than in Matthew and Mark combined.

One writer describes Luke as infatuated with parables. There are 22 in all, 17 not found elsewhere. 

Another emphasis is that on women. He refers to women 43 times, Matthew and Mark together only 49 times.

Prayer is yet another focus in Luke, including the prayer life of the Lord Jesus. This fits in with his emphasis on the Saviour’s humanity.

In many ways, Luke is the obvious Gospel for interested people in the west today. His approach chimes in very much with some of the most prevalent attitudes of our times. Is there someone you could pass a copy to?

This article first appeared in Grace Magazine

Reading the New Testament Mark's Gospel

Guided by the Spirit, each Evangelist selected from the historical material available with distinct purposes in mind. Human intentions and circumstances combine to give us a true picture of Christ and his work. It is generally accepted that Mark depicts Christ chiefly as Servant and Redeemer. The shortest Gospel, it is often the first people read.

Author

Like the other Gospels, the second bore no name at first but Mark’s soon began to appear on it. In the 4th Century Eusebius, quotes Papias (c AD 115) saying that Mark interpreted Peter, recording what he remembered, "yet not in order, the things which were either said or done by the Lord" and Clement of Alexandria (c AD 180) writing of how Mark was urged to record Peter’s preaching, Peter authorising the account to be read in churches. Other early church fathers agree. 2 Peter 1:15 possibly refers to this, I will be diligent that after my departure you may be able to call these things to mind. Another interesting pointer is the way Acts 10:34-43 follows the outline of Mark.

Younger than other New Testament writers, Mark was perhaps 20 years old when Christ died. He possibly witnessed Christ’s arrest. 14:51, 52 mentions a young man who followed Jesus and the disciples, wearing only a linen sheet. When the soldiers tried to seize him, he escaped naked. Not mentioned by others, it hardly adds to the narrative flow. It is likely that it was Mark, modestly refraining from identifying himself. Perhaps he observed the Lord’s final hours.

Bearing the names Yohanan (Jewish) and Marcus (Latin), John Mark was from a wealthy, Jerusalem family. Mary was his mother (Acts 12:12), Barnabas his cousin (Colossians 4:10). Perhaps he was converted after the events he records. Acts 12 reveals that the disciples were praying for Peter at Mary’s house. Perhaps it was a regular venue, as Peter went straight there. It is suggested that the Last Supper was held there. If so, Mark was well acquainted with early church leaders.

Later we read how Paul and Barnabas came from Antioch to Jerusalem (c 46 AD). On returning they took Mark. It must have been quite something to go to that great city. Later they were called to be missionaries (Acts 13:5) and Mark became their helper. Presumably they had recognised his potential when staying at Mary’s. Things seem to have gone well as far as Perga, where Mark left them (13:13). Nothing is spelled out as to why, but two years later, when preparing for a second journey (15:37-39), although Barnabas wanted to take Mark … Paul was not keen … because he had deserted them … They had such a sharp disagreement that they parted company. We learn that Barnabas took Mark to Cyprus.

We hear nothing of Mark until about 60 AD, when Paul’s prison epistles were probably written from Rome. Philemon 24 refers to him as a fellow-worker and Colossians 4:10 includes his greetings. Paul adds You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, welcome him. He says (4:11) that Mark has proved a comfort to me. Whether or not he went to Colosse, he helped Paul and was a trusted worker. Later in 2 Timothy 4:11 Paul says Mark is helpful to me in my ministry.

Date and place of writing

Mark must have been written within a generation of the events recorded. In 15:21 Simon of Cyrene is said to be father of Alexander and Rufus. These two play no part in the story and are probably not mentioned elsewhere (see Romans 16:13). This must mean that Mark and his first readers knew them. This is clearly in the first generation after Simon. As noted, Peter probably provided the raw material, which puts the origin before the mid-sixties, perhaps as early as AD 45. Irenaeus disagrees with others in stating that it appeared after Peter’s death, possibly AD 65-68. It must have been written before 70 AD at the latest, with its substance in common circulation some time earlier, even if it had not appeared in its final form. The otherwise unexplained mention of Rufus, who was possibly connected with Rome, suggests that Mark may have written from Rome or for believers there. Tradition supports this view.

Characteristics

Concise and clear in style and language, appealing to practical Roman minds, interested in and impressed by power. While Jews would be interested in a Messiah’s background (hence Matthew’s genealogy) Romans would be more interested in his actions. The word euthus (straightaway, immediately) occurs 42 times, more than in all the rest of the New Testament. Mark is interested in deeds not speculation and commentary. Jesus is an action man, one who got things done.

Christ’s deity is revealed through miracles, culminating in the greatest of these – the resurrection. Much space is given to miracles.

Of 70 parables or similar items in the Gospels, Mark records only 18. Some say there are really only four parables. Matthew has 19, Luke 27.

Of 35 miracles in total, Mark has 18. Luke has 20 in 91 pages of Greek text, Mark 18 in only 53.

Matthew records six discourses, Mark just one (13). Matthew is 60% words of Jesus, Luke 51%, Mark only 42%.

Ignored in most modern translations, as it makes for poor English, Mark is fond of beginning sentences with And. Twelve of 16 chapters begin with it, giving a sense of momentum.

The frequent use of the present continuous tense (some 150 times) is similar.

Few references to Jewish laws and customs occur. When given, they are explained more fully than in the other Synoptics. Many Latin terms occur (bushel (4:21), tribute (12:14), executioner (6:27), etc). In most cases equivalent Greek expressions existed. Were Latin terms chosen with the first readers in mind?

Crowd reaction is emphasised. They were amazed (1:27), critical (2:7), afraid (4:41), puzzled (6:14), astonished (7:37). Around 23 reactions are recorded, indicating Christ’s impact on people, favourable and unfavourable.

Though brief, Mark often has unique details. When the man with the withered hand is healed, only Mark records how Jesus looked at the crowd with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart (3:5). In 5:41 he records the Aramaic words spoken to Jairus’s daughter Talitha cum, which means Little girl, I say to you arise. Such touches add great vividness.

Purpose

Verse 1 states the subject, The beginning of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Perhaps it is an ancient heading added to the work. The abrupt opening is followed by Jesus’s first public appearance – at his baptism. The book is obviously not like modern biography. Christ’s ancestry, birth, parentage and early life are ignored. We have a succession of episodes from his life, probably in approximate chronological order. The Gospels emphasise Christ’s death and resurrection. Like the others, Mark gives more detail for the final week.

Jesus’s Person dominates the narrative. His miracles stand out, being performed for immediate human need not only to exhibit Christ to the crowds. There is steady progress toward the end purpose for which he came. Mark presents Christ as he was in daily life, living among men, the Servant come to serve. A key verse is 10:45. Jesus came not to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.

We can divide the book thus:

1-10 Serving: teaching and healing

11-16 Ransom being given: death and resurrection.

Mark is evangelistic, assuming little previous knowledge of God’s dealings with men. He sets the Saviour vividly before us as one able to save, one full of compassion for those coming to him in need. Over 90% of this Gospel duplicates material found in Matthew and Luke. Only three passages are unique

Parable, seed growing secretly 4:26-29

Healing, blind man at Bethsaida 8:22-26

Young man’s flight at Jesus’s arrest 14:43-52

Ending

Controversy surrounds 16:9-20. Did the earliest manuscripts end at 16:8? If so, was that where Mark (abruptly) finished or was the original ending lost? Are 16:9-20 genuine or an attempt to finish what seemed incomplete? Available Greek manuscripts offer three options

Long, including verses 9-20; short, ending one verse after verse 8; shortest, finishing at verse 8.

This is a textual question, not one imposed by liberals wanting to remove awkward verses. Evangelical scholars differ but reputable men, such as Hendriksen and Stonehouse, reject 16:9-20. Firm conclusions are difficult without the required expertise. Some question whether God would allow an erroneous addition to remain so long. The argument has force but raises unanswerable questions about the workings of providence in relation to Scripture preservation. Many evangelicals would say that it is best not to base a doctrine or practice solely on these verses, perhaps observing the excesses of snake-handling cults. Unless we consider such practices essential to Christian faith, that may well be the safest course.

Reading the New Testament Matthew's Gospel

Which is your favourite Gospel? Meaning good news, we use the word both for the Christian message and the first four New Testament books. In different ways, the Gospels combine to teach one unified gospel. In our Bibles, Matthew is first. It focuses on Jesus as divine Son of God and Messianic King. In the early church it was a liturgical favourite, perhaps because, in comparison with Mark, its narrative style is generally more concise. It is also perhaps the most orderly Gospel. Today we more readily turn to John or Mark. Perhaps we ought to give more attention to Matthew. 

Whether Matthew wrote first, we cannot be sure. In light of Chapter 24, he undoubtedly wrote before 70 AD, perhaps as early as 45 or may be 63-67. Now divided into 28 chapters, only Luke is longer. Some 68% of Matthew is replicated in other Gospels but the material has its own particular shape with unique material at either end. In 1:20-2:16 is Joseph’s vision, the Magi, flight to Egypt and Herod’s massacre. In Chapters 27 and 28 are the dream of Pilate’s wife, Judas’s death, the resurrection of Jerusalem saints, bribing the guards and the Great Commission. There are also 10 unique parables (tares, hidden treasure, costly pearl, dragnet, unmerciful servant, labourers in the vineyard, two sons, marriage of the King’s son, 10 virgins, talents) and three unique miracles (two blind men, mute demoniac, coin in a fish’s mouth). Matthew uses miracles more to prove Christ’s Messiahship than to advance narrative, even when duplicating Mark and Luke. 

Author and readers

A long and ancient tradition says that our first Gospel is by customs officer and apostle, Matthew Levi. The name Levi is not in Matthew and when it refers to his banquet, it simply says it was in the house not his house. It is the only Gospel to refer to Jesus paying the Temple tax, which may be significant. It was believed that Matthew wrote first in Hebrew or Aramaic. If so, what we have is a re-write rather than a translation.

The opening phrase, The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham is similar to the repeated phrase in Genesis the generations of ..... Christ’s genealogy follows. Matthew wants to show that all he relates about Jesus of Nazareth goes back to God’s covenants with Abraham and David of a great nation and an eternal house. These are fulfilled in him. Matthew portrays Christ as teacher but especially as king. The phrase kingdom of heaven occurs 33 times, kingdom of God five times and the royal, messianic title Son of David nine times. Because he had Jews in mind, Matthew often speaks of the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy, frequently quoting it or alluding to it. There are some 53 quotations, easily more than in any other Gospel.

Structure

In 4:17 and 16:21 we have the phrase From that time …. Seemingly insignificant, on both occasions it marks a major turning point. In 4:17, the opening of the Lord’s public teaching ministry. Having established the Lord’s identity from Scripture, Matthew relates that when the Lord heard that his forerunner John was in prison, from that time he began to teach and preach, saying Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. In 16:21, after Peter’s confession, we read From that time Jesus Christ began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer, etc.

Another distinctive of Matthew is the way major blocks of teaching occur, including the largest such block in all the Gospels, the Sermon on the Mount. As much as 60% of the work is teaching. To some extent the placing of these blocks gives the book its structure. Matthew obviously wanted to stress the content of the Lord’s teaching, especially in regard to his relationship with God’s Law, so that the full implications of the long awaited coming of Messiah might be clarified. These significant blocks of teaching are marked by a recurring concluding phrase When Jesus had finished these words …. It marks the close of the five sermons Matthew records. The five major blocks are located thus

Chapters 5-7 The Sermon on the Mount

Chapter 10 Commissioning the disciples

Chapter 13 Parables of the Kingdom

Chapter 18 Humility and forgiveness

Chapter 24, 25 The last things (Chapter 23 could also be included here)

Characteristics

Some have seen in these five major sections a parallel to the Five Books of Moses, the Torah. A new Moses gives a new Law for his disciples, a law written on the heart not tablets of stone. Certainly a theme in Matthew is that of fulfilment and it could be said that the New Testament people of God, Christ’s followers, are to fulfil what the Old Testament people failed to do. The Lord fulfils all that Scripture foretells. He also makes clear, in Chapters 5-7 for instance, their true meaning, which had been obscured by Pharisaic legalism. But Jesus does more than simply complete the old ways, he inaugurates a new way, with new and distinctive teaching. Some see 13:52 as a key verse Every scribe who has become a disciple of the kingdom of heaven is like a head of a household, who brings forth out of his treasure things old and new. First Century Teachers of the Law never said anything new. They always went back to the traditions for their teachings. The Lord himself had authority to build on what was given, not rejecting it but bringing out what was old and developing it and taking it consistently further to the fulfilment of God’s purposes. This is one reason why his teaching came to the people with authority and freshness.

Another feature is an apparent love for the number three. Examples include the threefold division of the genealogy (Chapter 1), three temptations (Chapter 4), three illustrations of righteousness, three prohibitions and three commands (Chapters 6, 7), three groupings of three types of miracle (Chapters 8, 9). It is unlikely that Matthew attached symbolic significance to the number. It is more likely that he had in mind the Jewish requirement that truth be established by testimony from two or three witnesses. It is suggestive of how his mind worked.

In summary, Matthew shows Jesus to be the one the prophets foretold, the Messiah. He shows that he came to his own but his own would not receive him. He also shows from the start, with the account of the Magi, that Gentiles would be drawn to him. The Gospel contains biting denunciations of the Jews for rejecting Messiah. For instance, the woes on the cities that rejected him (11:20-24), including a statement that must have staggered the Teachers of the Law and priests - they would be shown up at the Judgement by the Gentiles. Also note the lengthy discourse in Chapters 24, 25 on the overthrow of Jerusalem.

When did you last read Matthew’s Gospel? Perhaps it is time to get reading it again.

This article first appeared in Grace Magazine and is similar to the previous Guide to Matthew Article