Wittenberg Door Campus Ministry - Blog

Please Don't Confuse Ease with Lack of Preparation

9/21/2018

Fridays are for Rhetoric!
9/21/18

Quintilian, and J.S. Watson. Institutes of Oratory. Edited by Lee Honeycutt, 2010. Kindle Electronic Edition. Book 12 Chapter 8.

The work of an orator requires a great deal of study and preparation. Quintilian is concerned that orators do not prepare themselves adequately. They need to read and understand all the material related to their cases (Quintilian XII.8.2). Those who do not prepare often try to cover for their lack of preparation. Despite the various ways an orator tries to avoid proper preparations, all can be proven inadequate. Therefore, a responsible orator gains extensive understanding of his cases (Quintilian XII.8.7). Quintilian freely admits that not all evidence will be used in the court. Yet it must all be known to the orator (Quintilian XII.8.14). In this way, the orator can evaluate each argument he may need to answer. He can also consider what the judge would find most compelling (Quintilian XII.8.15).

Mark 9:30-37 - Lectionary for Pentecost 18B

9/20/2018

9/20/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Who is the greatest? Our world has recently been shaken by a series of revelations about powerful people within a Christian body using their power and authority for evil instead of for good. And it isn’t unusual to hear bits and pieces of history, especially when secularists are talking about the growth and movement of Christianity, to be phrased in terms of winners and losers, those who are more powerful taking advantage of those who are less powerful, and the mighty trampling the weak.

Make no mistake about it. The New Testament clearly portrays Jesus as the mighty creator, redeemer, and king, in whom resides all power in heaven and earth. But we are well instructed to see how, in Mark 9:30-37, Jesus seems to consider his power to be well used. When his disciples are wanting to decide who is the greatest of them all, Jesus exalts a little child, who has no particular power or wisdom. Do we want to be like Jesus? Then we will also care for the needs of those who can’t take care of themselves. We minister to the weak, the unknown, and the unknowing. When we have power, and some of us do have considerable power and authority, we use it for the good of those in need.

The priest or pastor has the training, the authority, and the responsibility to bring God’s Word to his flock. He has it in his power to heal or to hurt, to bind up or to loosen, to build or to destroy. How does he use that training, authority, and responsibility? He is to use it for the good of Christ’s kingdom, which cares about the least of these little children.

What if he’s using it for something else? What did Jesus do to his apostles who wanted to exalt themselves above others? Jesus brought them up short and reminded them what his true interest was. That’s what Jesus has given generation after generation of godly leaders in Christianity to do. I’ve seen that in action in my own church body. Time after time, when someone is falling into error and sin, his brother pastors, both those placed over him in positions of authority and those who simply know him and care for him, will come to him, confront him with his sin, and correct him. By God’s grace, the erring pastor is usually led to repentance, forgiveness, and restoration. God’s people are protected. At times, that doesn’t happen, and there are consequences, even going so far as removal from the pastoral ministry, removal from the church body, and civil prosecution. But by God’s grace, most of the time, the offense is small and the restoration is quick and full.

How will we care for the least of these? Let’s do it and seek to do it in a way that would be pleasing to Jesus, the one who cares for the least of us.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Canonicity

9/20/2018

Thursdays are for the New Testament
9/20/18
Carson, D.A., and Douglas Moo An Introduction to the New Testament - Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005. "New Testament Letters" Carson & Moo pp. 331-353

What is the “canon”? At first the word referred to a standard of faith. By the fourth century the term “canon” came to refer to a list of books that were considered authoritative Scripture. An important consideration in the study of canonicity is whether the canonical status or the functional authority came first. Carson and Moo explore that question first considering whether there was an authoritative list of canonical books of the Old Testament agreed upon by Jews prior to the first century. It does appear that there were canonical collections of the Torah and Prophets, though there seems to have been some doubt about identification of some canonical books. This suggests that canonicity is a matter of recognition of authority, rather than presentation of an authoritative list which will then be accepted because of the authority of those presenting it.

In studies of the New Testament books as referred to by patristic authors we see that the gospels and major Pauline letters are quoted very frequently, the rest of the New Testament is quoted less frequently, and other works that we know about are hardly ever quoted. We find a summary in Eusebius of Caesarea, who lived about 260-340.
p. 734 “In discussing the New Testament canon, Eusebius deploys a tripartite classification: the recognized books (homologoumena), the disputed books (antilegomena), and the books put forward by heretics in the name of the apostles but rejected by those Eusebius regards as orthodox. In the first category, Eusebius includes the four gospels, Acts, fourteen Pauline epistles (Eusebius includes Hebrews, though he is aware that the church in Rome did not hold Hebrews to be Pauline), 1 Peter, 1 John, and, apparently (though with some reservation) the Apocalypse. Eusebius subdivides the disputed books into those generally accepted (James, Jude, 2 Peter, and 2 and 3 John) and those that are not genuine (Acts of Paul, Shepherd of Hermas, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistle of Barnabas, the Didache, and, perhaps, the Apocalypse). The third category, embracing clearly heretical writings, including gospels such as those of Peter and Thomas, acts of Andrew and John, and similar writings (H.E. 3.25).”

How were writings recognized? First and foremost by conformity to “the rule of faith” (Latin regula fidei). Does the book conform to orthodox Christian truth? A second mark is “apostolicity, which as a criterion came to include those who were in immediate contact with the apostles” (p. 736). Wherever early Christians suspect a pseudonymous work they reject it. Finally, canonicity is recognized by widespread, continuous acceptance and usage. If the text is not generally accepted as Scripture, even if it fits the two other criteria, it is not recognized as canonical.

Carson and Moo conclude that canonicity is generally recognized, then codified in lists. We recognize canonical texts because of their long and consistent use within the Christian tradition, by their authorship, and by their apostolic content.

James 3:13-4:10 - Lectionary for Pentecost 18B

9/19/2018

9/19/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Some parts of our reading from James 3-4 are popular in the secular culture as well. It’s rare that a week goes by without giving me a chance to observe some well-meaning non-Christian person virtue signaling on social media by saying that real Christians should be humble, that real Christians would pursue peace, or that we all need to get rid of those selfish ambitions.

It’s telling, though, that those same individuals who think they are doing better than Christians, therefore deserve praise, are so hesitant to do things like submitting to God, drawing near to God, or seeking wisdom which comes from God rather than wisdom which comes from man. In short, they make a claim which often rightly says Christians don’t do well enough at some parts of the Christian walk, but are not willing to take on that Christian walk themselves and model what it really looks like.

This in itself is a sort of arrogant pride. It seeks to exalt itself rather than allowing God to do the exaltation. It is not going to be eternally satisfying. As a Christian, my response is fairly straightforward. It’s found right in James 3:13. I show that my works are doing in the wisdom of God by doing gentle good works. And the idea of “gentle” is important. Much of Christian service is done more or less in secret. Not wishing to draw attention to themselves or to the terrible plight of those they are helping, Christians will often carry on works of mercy and charity without any fanfare. I know one person who is very active with homeless people. These activities won’t be displayed on social media. The homeless people receiving assistance don’t want their needs to be broadcast. They just want to have help and resources to get through a tough time. I know several people who work intensively with victims of abuse. Do they really want the abusers to find out where their victims are? Do the victims really want to be portrayed as victims, rather than as people who have worked through their pasts and are more stable now? Not at all. So the work of the Christian is gentle and quiet, caring for the needy, healing the sick, bringing hope to the hopless, and then doing it all over again.

What’s the motivation for all this? It’s in the passage as well. We humble ourselves before God and let him do good works through us. It’s God’s love for others which can motivate us to all that we try to do. This is not social media shaming or re-education at the hands of a powerful secular society. It’s an expression of God’s care for the least of those living in his world.

Time to go, love and serve our neighbors, and trust the Lord’s mercy.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Following God's Law as Pleasing Obedience

9/19/2018

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces
9/19/18

Kolb, Robert. The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000.
Epitome “VI Concerning the Third Use of the Law” pp. 502-503.
Solid Declaration “VI. Concerning the Third Use of the Law” pp. 587--591.

Article six of the Formula of Concord speaks of different uses of God’s law. It identifies the functions as maintenance of external discipline, conviction of sin, and guidance in righteous living. The third use has been a matter of debate, as some theologians deny that “the law is to be urged upon reborn Christians” (Kolb 2000, 502). The Formula confesses that even though Christians are set free from the law of God, they are not without the law. Redemption draws them to keep the law of God as it is good and leads them to reflect God’s image. This guards Christians from going astray. “In order that people do not resolve to perform service to God on the basis of their pious imagination in an arbitrary way of their own choosing, it is necessary for the law of God constantly to light their way” (Kolb 2000, 502). The Formula goes on to distinguish between the works of the law and the fruits of the Spirit, affirming that it is important to make such a distinction.

The Solid Declaration addresses the situation in much the same terms. As usual, we find a more thorough description of the dispute and hits history here than in the Epitome (Kolb 2000, 587). The Christian, in living a righteous life, will be doing the things of God’s Law. The Formula of Concord makes it clear that God’s law is uniformly considered a good thing in the Scripture (Kolb 2000, 588). Again, since Christians are not perfected in this world, they need God’s law to guide their wills. Multiple scripture passages are presented as evidence for Christians needing the guidance of God’s law. The Gospel works to redeem and give new life. The Law shows what is important to God, though it gives no ability to do what God values (Kolb 2000, 589). The goal of the Christian life is to continue in holiness and piety. God’s law provides us with information to evaluate our lives (Kolb 2000, 590).

Jeremiah 11:18-20 - Lectionary for Pentecost 18B

9/18/2018

9/18/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our passage from Jeremiah 11 communicates on several levels at once. Here God has been speaking of his concern to establish his people Judah. The people have been opposed by enemies who desire their destruction. However, to make the illustration work, God is using Jeremiah the prophet as a sign of the people of Judah. He is under attack from within and without, being attacked and imprisoned. To make matters more complex, most would see in the life and work of Jesus a reference to this passage of Jeremiah. They would take Jesus to be the one who is wrongfully suffering for the sake of his people.

I already feel like I’m trying to hold five grocery bags while wearing big mittens and look for a key in my pocket. I’m ready to drop something, so I’d better get to the big picture as directly as possible. Then we’ll see if the picture fits in some other specifics.

God establishes a people according to his promise. Check. His people are attacked from within and without. Check. As God’s representative, Christ endures that attack, even though he doesn’t deserve it. Check. There’s our big picture.

What about Jeremiah the prophet then? He serves not only to point us to Christ but also to let us remember that we normal humans, prophets, priests, butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers are often the collateral damage in the attacks carried on against Christ and his kingdom. It’s all right. The Lord can protect his people, but he lets us suffer for the good of his kingdom at times. He’s promised that we will remain under his protection.

The attacks of the enemy are vicious. They are slash and burn. Destroy not only the fruit but the tree as well. The gratuitious nature of the damage brought by God’s enemies boggles the mind. Yet we remember, they are really not fighting against us. They are fighting against Christ, the Lord of all, who is quite able to defend himself and his kingdom clar up to the final day.

There’s nothing to be afraid of, Jeremiah! They might even level your city and kill you, but they won’t actually overcome you in the end. You are one of God’s children.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Not the Only Nation in Trouble

9/18/2018

Tuesdays are for the Old Testament
9/18/18

Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993. “Isaiah 1-37, part C, “The Universal Kingdom” (13:1-27:13) Loc. 3910-6649. 1. The First Cycle of Oracles. The Reality of the Lord’s Promises (13:1--20:6), Loc. 3910-5098.

Motyer sees Isaiah 13-27 continuing the theme of the perfect Davidic king who is the Messiah (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3915). The royal plans suggested in chapters 6-12 are discussed in more specific detail in 13-27. Chapters 13-20 consist of five oracles referring to specific peoples, starting at 13:1, 14:28, 15:1, 17:1, and 19:1. Chapters 21-23 are five more oracles (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3926). The first five oracles, chapters 13-27, speak to the reality of God’s promises (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4025).

Isaiah 13:1-14:27 is an oracle concerning Babylon (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4040). Motyer observes parallels in 13:2-16 and 14:24-27, ten 13:17-22 with 14:3-23. 14:1-2 speaks of the security of God’s people, the central idea (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4052). Babylon was a world power, though not predominant as was Assyria (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4070). Isaiah seems very aware that Judah would eventually fall to Babylon. 14:2-16 speaks of a gathering of forces and a coming day which cannot be escaped. Judah will be assaulted from all sides (v. 4). It will be a time of destruction and terror (v. 6) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4118). This day of judgment, according to verse 11, is based on a careful reckoning of sins. Motyer emphasizes that though people are acting as the agents of God they are still acting according to their desire and nature (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4175). Verses 17-22 look forward to the fall of Babylon to the Persians (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4190). This is long after Isaiah. The city did not fall until after 518 B.C. (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4221). In contrast to this scenario, God’s people will be restored (14:1-2). 14:3-23 appears to be highly poetic describing the fall of Babylon (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4246). Verse 3 portrays it as a release from bondage. This release has effects both on earth and in Sheol (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4317). motyer discusses the “morning star” image in 14:2 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4335). There is a reference to a Canaanite myth of a war in heaven which resulted in the king being cast out and placed in Sheol. In Isaiah God looks upon the king as he goes to his fate (vv. 16-17) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4358). Verses 24-27 return to the time of Isaiah, describing the current incident with Assyria as a model for the future of the world (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4398).

An oracle about Philistia follows in 14:28-32 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4404). motyer observes that Philistia was a major political ally of Egypt during the Assyrian period. Ahaz, who collaborated with Assyria, died, leaving an expectation that Hezekiah might be aligned with Philistia against Assyria (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4410). The oracle points up the fact that David himself struck Philistia, which will continue to be broken. Zion, on the other hand, will be safe and secure (v. 32) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4454).

Chapters 14-15 are an oracle about Moab (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4468). Moab is destined for destruction. This grieves God and the Moabite survivors. The destruction is due to Moab’s pride (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4472). This oracle is non-specific, not mentioning names or dates. The grief of both Moab in its many cities and of God is clear at the beginning of chapter 14. The Moabites will seek refuge with Israel (16:1-4) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4534). The reply to Moab in 16:4-5 is an assurance that by faith in God there is shelter (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4559). Moab continues in their trouble, which suggests proud refusal to trust God (16:6-8) (Motyer 1993, Loc. (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4577). God’s grief over Moab is again stated in 16:9-12. Moab will fall, as described in 16:13-14 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4615).

Chapters 17-18 are an oracle in five parts focused on Damascus (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4635). The nation will endure disaster, resulting in destruction of an international threat (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4640). The events seem to span a number of years, possibly 20-30 years. Isaiah brought them together in this passage (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4651). Damascus proves weak (17:1). The worldly powers, not depending on God, are futile. Resources will run short (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4698). The cure is trust in and return to the Lord 17:7-8) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4710). God is the true rock and secure place. In 17:12-18:7 God’s kingdom is the place where all the world can come for safety (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4770). The strength of God is sufficient for all the nations.

The fifth oracle, in 19:1-20:6, pertains to Egypt (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4859). Motyer reviews the promise in Isaiah 17:3 of the Gentiles’ entrance into the promises of God. In this oracle Egypt and Assyria are to be chastised and brought into equality with Israel. By 715 B.C. Egypt was the most likely ally of Judah in resistance against Assyria (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4871). This oracle says that Egypt is to expect trouble as well. Those economic and social problems are tied directly to a failure to trust in God (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4891). The highly repetitive language may suggest the national instability to be found in Egypt (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4915). Motyer observes that the concepts of 19:1-15 are paralleled in 19:16-25 as the Lord lays out his means of healing in the same order (Motyer 1993, Loc. 4979).

Psalm 54 - Lectionary for Pentecost 18B

9/17/2018

9/17/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Psalm this week is a difficult one. It says with absolute clarity that the Psalmist is afraid of his opposition and that he fears for his life. As a response, the plea is that God will come, rescue him, and annihilate the opposition. This is a difficult passage to deal with. After all, Christians are used to thinking of the meek and mild Jesus who loves everyone. This is probably the Savior who feeds his enemies cookies and milk, makes them nice, tucks them in, and gives them a teddy bear. But that isn’t the God pictured in the Bible.

What we find in the Bible is a benevolent and kind King of all creation. And we need to realize that kings exercise rule. They call the shots and do their will. Another thing we find in this passage is that God’s Psalmist is not the one who is the offender here. The opposition has brought violence against the author without provocation. The Psalmist calls upon God to take vengeance against those who are acting offensively without cause.

God is, after all, exactly the kind of God who will defend his people against unprovoked attack. God’s children receive his sovereign care and protection. He is the King of all, but particularly of his children who believe on him. That’s the key to the whole situation. In God’s mercy, He has adopted a people. He’s going to defend them, even if it costs their opposers their own lives. God is the one who has shown mercy especially to his people. When we call upon him as the loving God, we ask him to consider us as part of his kingdom, where he will rule for our good.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Greek and Roman Families

9/17/2018

Mondays are for Church History
9/17/18

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Amazon Kindle Edition, 2014.
Volume 2, Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, “Chapter 8. Christian life in Contrast with Pagan Corruption.” Sections 88-103, Loc. 16158-17158.

§ 98. The Heathen Family.

Schaff asserts that in Greek and Roman paganism the only regulaly recognized virtues were political in nature. Aristotle and Plato both considered the state as sovereign even over the family. Schaff considers this a very negative situation. “This political absolutism destroys the proper dignity and rights of the individual and the family, and materially hinders the development of the domestic and private virtues” (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16749). Women were kept under guard at home and considered as property rather than receiving respect in their own right. Schaff finds the ritual temple prostitutes accorded more respect than the average wife (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16768). For a while Romans treated their wives better than the Greeks. Yet their status remained low and the state of marriage was less important than civic relations within the government (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16778). Arrangements of concubinage were common, though adultery was frowned upon (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16797). All in all, Schaff describes a culture in which the sexual ethic would generally be considered obscene (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16801). Husbands bore the right to a divorce, as well as the right to inflict capital punishment on slaves or children. This was generally overcome during the rise of Christianity (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16811).

Pursuit of Justice Doesn't Require Free Services

9/14/2018

Fridays are for Rhetoric!
9/14/18

Quintilian, and J.S. Watson. Institutes of Oratory. Edited by Lee Honeycutt, 2010. Kindle Electronic Edition. Book 12 Chapter 7.

In book 12 chapter 7 Quintilian moves to the best work for a young orator. He recommends working in defense before prosecution (Quintilian XII.7.1). Defending people appropriately but allowing justice to operate against the guilty is an important public service (Quintilian XII.7.2). The good orator will consider the character and case of those who would bring cases. He should pursue justice in just causes (Quintilian XII.7.6). He can and should receive payment (Quintilian XII.7.9). However, he should not be seen as a profiteer.

Mark 9:14-29 - Lectionary for Pentecost 17B

9/13/2018

9/13/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

This week’s Gospel reading is from Mark chapter nine. I’d like to use it briefly to practice a skill which all Christians should have. Please bear with me. In the passage, a crowd has gathered around a father and boy. The boy’s father has described a problem, which he says is an evil spirit. The description of symptoms looks a lot like epileptic seizures. Jesus, by his command, appears to bring healing to the boy.

Now, enter on the scene the disputer of this age who says this was merely a medical condition. After a seizure the person seems normal. All Jesus’ words did was to provide a little time until the seizure passed, then the boy was fine. Jesus could get the credit for healing. It’s all made up. The talk of evil spirits was just a cultural expectation. Therefore, the disputer today says, Christianity is just a sham. The outcome would have been the same regardless.

Let’s unpack this a little bit. First, observe that the putative author of Mark’s Gospel was an eyewitness or a long-time companion of an eyewitness, Peter. Disciples hungry for power would more likely have invented a story in which they would be the heroes, not the sadly faithless people who missed the boat and couldn’t do any good for anyone. There really isn’t an element of self-preservation in this story. It has all the marks of a true confession.

Second, there were multiple witnesses around. Some of the witnesses were hostile witnesses, the scribes. If this were a made-up story, they would have to be persuaded as well or the story could not survive without serious questions being raised.

Third, the command of Jesus provoked a new attack. This isn’t how epilepsy works. It looks more like a fairly desperate attempt by a spiritual power to retain influence in the boy’s life. When under threat of expulsion, the symptoms worsen, so much so that the boy seems to have died. Once again, there are a number of witnesses. It isn’t the kind of thing you forget easily. If someone is trying to make it into something it isn’t, you are very likely to complain, but we have no evidence of disputes.

What’s the logical conclusion we come to? The report in Mark’s Gospel is a credible eyewitness report of something which really happened in the presence of hostile witnesses who agreed about what happened. The events show all the signs of being supernatural in origin. And we have Jesus’ word that it was through prayer that the boy was rescued from an evil spirit. The wisest interpretation is to assume that the events really happened as we are told in the text.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Revelation

9/13/2018

Thursdays are for the New Testament
9/13/18
Carson, D.A., and Douglas Moo An Introduction to the New Testament - Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005. "New Testament Letters" Carson & Moo pp. 331-353
“Revelation” Carson & Moo pp. 697-725

In many ways Revelation is one of the most difficult books in the New Testament. The book has a complicated and multi-faceted structure. Unfortunately, the different ways the structure may be interpreted make significant differences in the interpretation of the book as a whole. Carson and Moo think the most likely unifying theme is the repetitive use of groups of seven. They therefore outline the book as follows:
Prologue (1:1-20)
Messages to seven churches (2:1-3:22)
Vision of heaven (4:1-5:14)
Seven seals (6:1-8:5)
Seven trumpets (8:6-11:19)
Seven significant signs (12:1-14:20)
Seven bowls (15:1-16:21)
Triumph of Almighty God (17:1-21:8)
New Jerusalem (21:9-22:9)
Epilogue (22:10-21)

Early Christian testimony ascribes the book to the apostle John. However, by the later second century there were those who did not accept that view and assigned authorship to other people, in part because of the potential for interpreting chapter 20 as teaching “chiliasm,” an early term for “premillennialism,” which has historically been rejected by the Church. This cast doubt on the book’s canonicity as well. Contemporary doubts about apostolic authorship have to do more with the lack of apostolic claims in the text and stylistic differences between this and writings more universally ascribed to John. Those arguments are inconclusive, as the same author may write in a different style and with different types of claims when writing with very different intents. The book claims to be written from the island of Patmos, a place of exile used by Roman authorities.

Dating of the book of Revelation is also problematic. John lived a very long time. Early Christian authors suggest authorship during the reign of Domitian, Claudius, Trajan, or Nero. Carson and Moo consider Claudius too early and Trajan too late, leaving the most likely times during the reign of Nero (54-68) or Domitian (81-96). Both times had surges in persecution, both had increased emphasis on worship of the emperor, thus inciting the kind of struggles we find in the churches from chapters 2 and 3. Revelation 11:1-2 may suggest that the temple in Jerusalem is still standing. Yet much of the language in the book is metaphorical, so it is difficult to tell if the author refers to the temple in Jerusalem or a temple in heaven. Carson and Moo tend toward the reign of Domitian.

The book is written to seven churches in Asia Minor, probably well known to John, who had lived and worked in the area for years. Is it an apocalypse? If so, and the opening lines seem to indicate it is, it is an early example of one. Apocalypses are often pseudonymous and very symbolic. However this book does not seem to be pseudonymous. Could it rightly be considered an epistle? Possibly, though it is very complicated and symbolic in nature.We are probably safest considering it an early form of an apocalypse, but one which does not follow all the patterns which emerged by the close of the second century.

Revelation gained canonical status quite early in the West, as early as first half of the second century. It was disputed in the East into the third century. However, it was eventually received throughout Christianity. Just the same, scholars consider that Revelation is one of the books which is best interpreted in light of the canonical Gospels, Acts, the Pauline Epistles, and 1 John, rather than serving as the guide to interpret those other books.

How is the text interpreted? Four basic approaches exist in modern scholarship. First, we see the “preterist” approach. This says that the visions describe events in John’s time. Symbols and visions refer to events in the world in that day. John uses them to urge faithfulness to Christ. In the “historical” approach people see a sketch of history from Christ to the present. This approach was widely used during the Reformation, especially identifying the beast with the Papacy. In the “futurist” approach scholars look for the fulfillment of all the events in very end of the world. Finally, in an “idealist” approach scholars view Revelation as explaining the general ways of the world and God’s person as he works in the world. Carson and Moo find some truth in all approaches but tend to view the futurist approach as the most useful.

Throughout Revelation we see an emphasis on the sovereignty of God. God is able to bring all things to their rightful conclusion. There is a very high Christology. Jesus is portrayed as God. Though Jesus is presented clearly as the almighty God, the cross is always visible. Everything Jesus does is related to his death for the sins of the world. We also see the reality of God’s judgment against all sin, as he pours out his wrath and rescues his people, those whose names are written in the book of life. Revelation gives great comfort to people who are suffering, whether in the first century or the twenty-first century.

James 3:1-12 - Lectionary for Pentecost 17B

9/12/2018

9/12/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

A few years ago I wanted to get some pointers on how to make a simple cheese. Like many in this day and age, I turned to the Internet. I found many videos which I hoped would prove instructional. I bet you’ve seen some of these videos also. “I wanted to ______ so here’s what I did. I never did it before but it came out pretty well. Now you know how to do it also.” Yes, indeed, in a pile of cheesemaking videos, there were a few experts who knew what they were doing and a huge pile of people who had, at best, done it once before.

Our reading from James chapter 3 counsels Christians not to desire to be teachers. They will be held to a stricter standard of judgment. It then goes on to talk about how difficult it is to control the tongue, which has the power to cause harm like nothing else in this world. How should we deal with this passage?

First, I think it’s important that we recognize James chapter three doesn’t say the Scripture is uniformly difficult to understand and that interpretation should be left to the experts. That is decidedly not what James is saying. If you have any inclination to read and study the Bible, you should do it. Read with an open mind and heart, expecting God to instruct you through His infallible word!

Here’s what James is warning against, though. What about all those teachers who are looking for something new, something powerful, some sort of insight that will suddenly change the world? There have been several influential teachers in the past who have said that they found out how we should really understand the Bible, and that it is different from everything all the generations before them thought. Really? Do you actually want to say that every theologian before you got it all wrong?

When I was exploring Lutheranism I wrote a series of blog posts about the liturgy, about Law and Gospel, and about the sovereign grace of God. I was testing the water. They were tentative posts. I was hoping for correction and interaction. In general, the interaction I received was affirmation from people who had more experience with Lutheran doctrine. They were saying, “That’s right, you’ve understood what we have been saying.” It’s a very good thing to recognize that some teachers, throughout history, have gotten things very right, and that we can understand them. That’s different from the attitude we see so often. Someone has a religious opinion, maybe a move from one theological camp to another, and sets himself up as an expert. After all, he was wrong before but is right now, so it’s time to set the rest of the world right also.

This is very much like making the instructional video of how to make cheese when you have done it successfully yourself exactly once before. Premature. And, in a way, it is more dangerous. If I learn to make cheese wrong, I get bad cheese. No big problem. If I learn to do Christian theology wrong, I bring eternal condemnation to myself and possibly others. Big problem.

Let’s try to improve ourselves as teachers before we spend too much time teaching anything revolutionary. There’s a great deal to be gained from the counsel of others. Let’s guard our tongues as well as our keyboards, and seek to be good and right before God.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Distinguishing Law and Gospel

9/12/2018

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces
9/12/18

Kolb, Robert. The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000.
Epitome “V Concerning Law and Gospel” pp. 500-501.
Solid Declaration “V. Concerning Law and Gospel” pp. 581-586.

The fifth article of the Formula of Concord deals with Law and Gospel. At issue was whether gospel preaching includes “a preaching of repentance and rebuke, which condemns unbelief” (Kolb 2000, 500). While the words “law” and “gospel” can be used in a rather vague manner, strictly speaking law gives instruction and condemns sin. Gospel tells what we should believe about the atoning work and forgiveness of Christ. In Scripture the word “gospel” can be “used for the entire teaching of Christ,” therefore, it is appropriate to refer to gospel as “a proclamation of both repentance and the forgiveness of sins” (Kolb 2000, 500). But when law and gospel are contrasted, we should use the more strict meaning of each. A preaching of law only, especially when it is referred to as gospel, can make people presumptuous or can drive them to despair, as they may look to their obedience as the means of forgiveness of sins (Kolb 2000, 501). Therefore, we avoid teaching that the gospel is a call to repentance or that the law is a proclamation of mercy.

The Solid Declaration elaborates the danger of confusing law and gospel. It “obscures the merit of Christ and robs troubled consciences of the comfort that they otherwise have in the holy gospel when it is preached clearly and purely” (Kolb 2000, 581). Among some of the Augsburg theologians, there was the opinion that “the gospel is really not only the proclamation of grace but also at the same time a proclamation of repentance, which reproves the greatest sin, unbelief (Kolb 2000, 581). Therefore it became necessary to reaffirm the strict definition of gospel as only the message of God’s grace. Again, while the term “gospel” is allowed as a broad term in the New Testament, illustrated in detail in the Solid Declaration (Kolb 2000, 582), to maintain clarity in preaching and in theological discourse, the more strict meaning of the term is strongly preferred. This preserves the understanding that the gospel is truly about forgiveness of sins procured through Jesus (Kolb 2000, 583). A failure to make this distinction can create people who are presumptuous or despairing. The language in the Solid Declaration is largely the same as in the Epitome, cited above. It is then elaborated upon with a reference to the “alien work” of the Holy Spirit, based on Isaiah 28:21. This is explained by Dr. Luther, commenting on John 14:26 and 16:7-8. He sees that the genuine preaching of the gospel “points to and bestows nothing else than grace and forgiveness in Christ” (Kolb 2000, 583). Again, the Solid Declaration emphasizes that the strict definitions of law and of gospel make the requirement of repentance and obedience clear, as well as the gracious gift of salvation in Christ (Kolb 2000, 584). The only potential demand of the gospel is that we believe the grace of God. It is therefore a message of comfort, not a call to repentance in any way (Kolb 2000, 585).

Isaiah 50:4-10 - Lectionary for Pentecost 17B

9/11/2018

9/11/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Old Testament passage from Isaiah chapter 50 points very clearly to Jesus. He is the one who speaks to our troubles, who listens, who does what is right without rebellion. He is the one who, in verse six, gives his back and his cheeks to those who tore out his beard. He goes willingly into trouble, knowing that God will vindicate him.

There are generally two directions that preaching about this passage can go. Actually, there’s one direction which it normally goes, and another direction in which it should go. The way it normally goes is to reduce Jesus to the level of an example. Now I know that Jesus is an example, but he is not only an example. Unfortunately, this passage is often used to reduce Jesus’ role. We saw how Jesus suffered. We need to be like him in his suffering. We find Jesus uncomplaining when people sin against him. We need to do the same. When we do it well enough, we are shown to be like Jesus.

That’s all well and good. but what of the times we fail? Can we find forgieness? What was Jesus doing when all this transpired? Does it even matter that he was dying in my place for my sin? Thatis the direction this passage actually points. It shows a Saviorwho gives himself for me. All the suffering he is subjected to is suffering I desere. He undergoes it all without complaint because he cares for me. His love and sacrifice are powerful on my behalf.

Make no mistake. Here Jesus is presented in his self-sacrificing power. That is his right role, as the one who can rescue from death itself. My role is now to trust him and faithfully receive his gifts. This is true Gospel.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Judgment with Hope for Restoration

9/11/2018

Tuesdays are for the Old Testament
9/11/18

Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993. “Isaiah 1-37, part B, “The Triumph of Grace” (6:1-12:6) Loc. 2243-3909.

Motyer considers Isaiah 6-12 to be a more specific statement of the divine judgment and divine promise which Isaiah summarized in chapters 1-5 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2243). There is a statement of commission, then two accounts of decision, judgment, a remnant, and a hope. This section concludes with an individual speaking of salvation and reaching out to a community (Motyer 1993, Loc.2262).

Chapter 6 speaks of Isaiah’s reconciliation to God and his commissioning as a prophet (Motyer 1993, Loc.2268). Isaiah dates this event in the year of Uzziah’s death (about 750 B.C.). He is the only prophet to give a date in terms of death (Motyer 1993, Loc.2283). Motyer observes a possible reason. “Uzziah, as the darkness of death closed in upon him, was symbolic of Isaiah’s view of the nation, its plight and its problem” (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2288). God shows himself as the sovereign king (Motyer 1993, Loc.2293). The holiness of God makes him unapproachable by beings such as Isaiah (Motyer 1993, Loc.2325). Isaiah confesses the guilt which he has, analogous to the guilt of all the people (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2336). The cleansing which is brought from the altar serves as a substitute for the condemnation which Isaiah deserved (Motyer 1993, Loc.2348). The task assigned to Isaiah in verses 9-13 is very odd. He is to speak in such a way that hearts will be hardened (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2374). Isaiah begs by speaking very clearly and simply. The listeners rejected the message to the extent that they would no longer hear (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2386). Motyer notes the great promise of verse 13. A remnant will remain and grow (Motyer 1993, Loc.2409).

Chapters 7-11 broaden the scope of Isaiah. Rather than dealing with individual guilt, penalty, and restoration as in chapter 6, the situation is played out in the context of international politics. The issue remains the same - whether or not God is trustworthy (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2425). Motyer gives context of the situation from 2 Kings 15 and 2 Chronicles 28 (Motyer 1993, Loc.2432). King Ahaz, under threat from Assyria, was advised to make an alliance. Isaiah pointed out that God would protect against Assyria (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2452). Judah must stand by faith or fall (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2489). Though God offers Ahaz a sign, Ahaz refuses. Motyer identifies this as a failure to trust God’s judgment and good will (Motyer 1993, Loc.250). God’s sign in Isaiah 7:14, the birth of a child, is often identified as a confirmation of God’s truth despite Ahaz’ doubt (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2525). Motyer discusses the term translated “virgin” at some length, concluding that the most normal understanding is of a pre-marriage young woman. The prophecy of a child seems to be anticlimactic. However, Motyer says, it must point forward to the Davidic heir who is to come (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2576). This is no longer an anticlimax but the culmination of salvation. The child is to be born at a time which seems immediate but also at the right time for a future ingathering (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2599). Neither Isaiah not Motyer explains this situation. In the meantime, Judah’s power will fail. God will call enemies against Judah (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2674). A swarm or razor (7:20) will come against Judah (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2689). All the people are warned of this series of events in their future (8:1) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2712). Still, in chapter 8, the contrast between a life of faith and dependence on human might is made clear (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2747).

Amid destruction, 8:9-22 speaks again of God’s preserving a remnant (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2769). God will rescue his people with the agency of his Davidic king, Immanuel (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2814). The political enemy is not to be feared. God is the one to fear 2842). Confidence is found in waiting and trusting God (8:17) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2876). On the contrary, those who are not faithful will be in exile, privation, and will even curse God (8:21) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2930).
The start of chapter 9 returns to the future hope of the remnant (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2941). “The hope is sure . 9:1-7 is couched in past tenses; the future is written as something which has already happened” (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2941). The restoration to come is sure and complete, more so than the Exodus (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2970). Further, in 9:1, the restoration brings hope even to the Gentiles (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3005). In verse 6 all this restoration is brought about by the birth of the Child. Motyer observes this is not his work, but simply his birth (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3058). The names given to the Child, like other names in Isaiah, are significant in understanding his role and work (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3070). We note the eternal quality of the promised kingdom. The realm will spread, bringing peace (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3098).

Motyer adds a discursive note on the term “wonderful” used in 9:6 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3114). The word and others in its family have a strong history of referring to that which no human could accomplish. It therefore is normally applied to divinity.

In Isaiah 9:810:16 Isaiah speaks of Israel as if of a nation which is not divided. The means of redemption remains one Messiah (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3166). God’s message has gone out but has been rejected (9:8) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3177). This brings collapse, anarchy, and perversion. Motyer sees this as a pattern in Israel dealing with Assyria, as well as the broader application to all nations (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3219). The cure for this fall is repentance, turning to the Lord (9:13) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3240). Apart from repentance, all the people can expect is God’s rejection. The symptoms of rejection include disorder and lack (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3294). Chapter 10 verses 1-4 end the poetic structure begun in chapter 9 by turning attention back to the inept leaders (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3301). Verses 5-15 of Isaiah 10 speak of judgment to come (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3369). God’s choice to use the Assyrians as a tool of judgment, then to destroy Assyria is problematic. “At this point we come face to face with the biblical paradox: the Lord is sovereign, but his instruments are morally responsible agents” (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3388). Motyer goes on to illustrate this concept. The king who has become confident in his ruthless power will himself come to ruin (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3423).

Isaiah 10:16-34 speaks strongly of God’s judgment and the fulfillment of his promises (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3476). Motyer comments on the extensive use of metaphor and careful balance of the writing. Judgment will fall on Assyria as they assault God’s people in Judah.

In chapter 11:1-16, Isaiah speaks of “the hope of the royal Messiah. Again, it is specifically a word of assurance for the dark day of the Assyrian threat but contains in itself clear indications that its fulfilment is for time yet to come” (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3612). Motyer observes that “the root of Jesse” would not simply refer to another king, but to another David, someone of overwhelming importance (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3639). The Spirit of the Lord will equip this Messianic figure for all the works God intends (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3657). The close relationship between the shoot and God is seen clearly in verses 3-5 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3674). He is utterly righteous, clothed with all the capacities needed for reign (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3697).Hostile relations which we would consider normal will be transformed into peace (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3709). The high point is in verse 10 where the Root draws nations to himself (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3747). All this is accomplished by God’s hand (vv. 11-16). (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3753).

Isaiah 12 is a song to be sung in the day of deliverance (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3814). The text refers in detail to chapter 6, serving as an epilogue. The people who have been redeemed by God are now able to tell the truth of God to one another freely (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3825). All this is based on God’s initiative, approaching his people with forgiveness (Motyer 1993, Loc. 38550. The human response in verses 4-6 is to return praise to God (Motyer 1993, Loc. 3880).

Psalm 116:1-9 - Lectionary for Pentecost 17B

9/10/2018

9/10/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Psalm this week praises God because He is the kind of God who hears and answers when we are in distress. This might not seem to be a big deal for anyone raised in the sorta-Christian culture of Western civilization. After all, that’s what we automatically think a deity would do. But that very concept, the idea that a deity would actually care, is rooted in Chritianity. The religions which surrounded Israel, like most world religions, featured deities who were capricious and demanded appeasement, which would often be to no effect.

The God of the Bible stands in stark contrast. He is the one who is gracious and merciful. He hears the cries of his people and comes to care for them. He rescues them even though, even especially since they are helpless. This is truly a big deal. The Psalmist knows that the true God is different from all others. We praise Him because He is exactly that special kind of God, the one we need.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Christianity and Slavery

9/10/2018

Mondays are for Church History
9/10/18

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church (The Complete Eight Volumes in One). Amazon Kindle Edition, 2014.
Volume 2, Ante-Nicene Christianity A.D. 100-325, “Chapter 8. Christian life in Contrast with Pagan Corruption.” Sections 88-103, Loc. 16158-17158.

§ 97. The Church and Slavery.

Schaff observes a lack of regard for natural human rights among pagans (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16653). The essential relationship in society was one of power which would oppress others. Those not in power were considered the enemy to those in power. Enslavement of the poor and of enemies was the norm (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16658). Christianity fought against slavery by a moral argument of the equal dignity of all men (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16663). Due to the large number of enslaved people, there was no mass movement to end slavery. The eschatological views of the Church may also have contributed, as most would look to a future hope and not worry about earthly bondage (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16673). From the time of Constantine, some legal changes enforced more humane treatment and made it easier for a mster to formally release a slave (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16687). Conversion of slaves to Christianity was very common in the early period (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16691). Christians who were slaves could rise even to roles such as bishop. They also were recognized among the martyrs (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16691). Schaff’s conclusion is that those slaves who were Christians lived in a spiritual and moral freedom which allowed for life in society regardless of their state of enslavement (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16701). When slave owners became Christians there was a radical change in relationship as well (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16706). The equality found in Christ tended to make the master/slave relationship more like that of an employer and employee relating more or less as equals (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16715). Slaves were often set free by Chrsitian masters. Owners of large numbers of slaves are mentioned in catacomb inscriptions as releasing thousands of slaves (Schaff 2014, Loc. 16725).

Youth and Experience Valuable

9/7/2018

Fridays are for Rhetoric!
9/7/18

Quintilian, and J.S. Watson. Institutes of Oratory. Edited by Lee Honeycutt, 2010. Kindle Electronic Edition. Book 12 Chapter 6.

Quintilian discusses the appropriate age for an orator to carry on cases in public in book 12 chapter 6. He notes that many orators have begun public cases at an early age (Quintilian XII.6.1). However, maturity is required of an orator (Quintilian XII.6.2). This does not mean that one must reach an advanced age before working as an orator. “If we estimate the two separately, practice without learning will be of more avail than learning without practice” (Quintilian XII.6.4). It is important that the orator, at first, practice with cases which are not too difficult (Quintilian XII.6.6). This can spur the young speaker to refine his skills more until he is fully mature.

Mark 7:31-37 - Lectionary for Pentecost 16B

9/6/2018

9/6/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Gospel passage from Mark 7:31-37 shows Jesus acting in love for his neighbor. He does this by bringing healing through very earthly means. After bringing the deaf man away by himself he engages in some very tactile actions. He touches the man’s ears and his tongue. Here Jesus also spits, which people try to interpret in many different ways. What is he doing? So far, everything Jesus has done can be understood by the deaf man. And the deaf man can agree with Jesus’ actions. When the fingers go in his ears he agrees that he can’t hear. When the finger t ouches the tongue he agrees that he has trouble speaking. But what does Jesus do next? He makes a command to the man’s ears. “Be opened.” Of course, the man cannot hear this command. He isn’t trying to hear. After all, he is deaf.

Jesus does what is impossible for this man. He opens his ears and frees his speech by his command. It’s a command which the man can’t even receive. Yet Jesus’ word is powerful.

What does Jesus do in his people and in the world? By his gracious word of command he gives life by creating faith to hear him. By his mercy he places us in a world where sick people recover, where food and water are generally readily available, and where we normally get along with one another relatively well. By his love he raises up those who will proclaim God’s words of Law and Gospel, calling us to sorrow for our sin and toreceive forgiveness, life, and salvation by grace through faith. God in Christ is good to this world, even when we don’t wish to listen to him. He cares regardless. Just like he can heal the deaf man through a word of command, he can bring the spiritually dead to life by the Gospel.

Our response? Believe that Jesus can really work in us, just as He did in the deaf man. He is faithful.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

1, 2, 3 John

9/6/2018

Thursdays are for the New Testament
9/6/18
Carson, D.A., and Douglas Moo An Introduction to the New Testament - Second Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005. "New Testament Letters" Carson & Moo pp. 331-353
“1, 2, 3 John” Carson & Moo pp. 669-87

1 John, without a personal introduction stating who the recipient may be, and without a concluding section addressing immediate plans and bringing greetings, is not of the same nature as the letters of Paul. Carson and Moo suggest that the letter may have been intended to go to a number of congregations and have a more personal note to accompany it. They suggest that 2 John may be one such note, though 3 John does not seem to fit the “cover letter” pattern as well. There are references to the Johanine epistles by the end of the first century, though specific references to them as written by John do not appear until the middle of the second century. Scholars remain divided as to the authorship and dating of the letters. However, Carson and Moo tend to lean toward the epistles being written by the apostle John, as there is not adequate evidence to support a strong case for any other author. If the letters were written by John late in his life, the most likely source is Ephesus, where early tradition reports John settling. Dating of the letters is closely tied to the date of John’s Gospel. The epistles seem to have come after the gospel, as they make what seems to be passing reference to matters discussed in the gospel. Since 1 John also is alluded to in some subapostolic fathers, it seems to fit best in the early 90s, if not slightly earlier. The addressee of 1 John is not stated. 2 John appears to be addressed to a Christian congregation, not a particular person. 3 John is addressed to a Gaius, one of the most common names in the Roman Empire. Thus we have no clear identification of an addressee.

1 John speaks to certain errors in the Christian faith, errors which include denial of Christ’s bodily being. These errors are found in Gnosticism, though it is not fully-formed until the second century. They are found particularly in the Docetic beliefs, and can also be found, at least in part, in the heresy propounded by Cerinthus, someone known to John in Ephesus, where the two had a noted dispute.

The text of the letters is generally quite well documented, except for 1 John 5:7-8a which is not found in any early manuscripts but is found in some commentaries. 1 John was accepted in the canon quite early, though 2 and 3 John were accepted with more hesitancy. Recent scholarship has focused on identifying the community which may have written the letters in John’s name. Literary and rhetorical elements have also sparked interest among scholars. The theme which has contributed a great deal to Christian belief and practice is that innovation is dangerous. We are well advised to hold fast to that faith which was passed to us by the Lord through the apostles.

James 2:1-10, 14-18 - Lectionary for Pentecost 16B

9/5/2018

9/5/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

The letter of James in the New Testament gets a lot of bad press. Theologicans of a more literal bent like to portray it as contradictory to Paul’s writings. After all, they say, James teaches a dependence on works, while Paul asserts that salvation is by grace through faith alone. What’s more, they say, pointing the skewer straight at a Lutheran, Luther didn’t really trust James. Ha! Take that!

Let’s unpack this situation for a moment. James was one of the writings which was slower than some to be recognized by Christians. That was not due to any concerns about the content. On the contrary, because the name “James” was very common, and because the letter was not altogether well identified, it was slow to be adopted. It became recognized as canonical on the strength of the content, rather than becaue of a known author.

What about Luther, then? Granted, Martil Luther was on the forefront, the cutting edge, of the Reformation. He didn’t use James very much, but he was very familiar with the text. There’s no doubt about it. He translated it carefully into German. Luther’s hesitation, again, was not due to the content but due to the fact that the author was unidentified.

How about the alleged argument between James and Paul? Please read Ephesians 2:8-10 and note that verse 10 follows immediately on the heels of verses 8-9. Christians are saved by grace through faith, with the intent that they will do good works. After all, God, the one who is good, likes good works since they are good.

How does that reconcile with James? James never asserts salvation by works. But in chapter 2 verse 18 he says he is unable to show his faith apart from works. So he does good works. After all, they are good. They are used to care for our neighbor and our world.

What will we do, then? We hold to faith in Jesus. That living faith expresses itself in good works toward our neighbor. The Scripture is consistent.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

Why good works? They are good.

9/5/2018

Wednesdays are for Bits and Pieces
9/5/18

Kolb, Robert. The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2000.
Epitome “IV Concerning Good Works” pp. 497-500.
Solid Declaration “IV. Concerning Good Works” pp. 574-581.

The Formula of Concord discusses two controversies faced by some churches. While some theologians began confessing that good works were necessary for salvation, others, in contrast, said that good works were harmful. Some of those in the “necessary” camp, recognizing that the good works they were prescribing did not contribute to salvation, modified their statement to say that Christians were “free” to do good works. At the root of the controversy was the nature of the freedom Christians had to do good works. Those who have been regenerated can be expected to do good works. Where they by compulsion of the Holy Spirit? Possibly as a necessary outcome? The Formula of Concord attempts to clarify the situation here (Kolb 2000, 498).

Good works can certainly be expected to follow regeneration. The nature of the Christian is to do good works. However, those good works do not contribute in any way to justification, which is entirely a gift of God. Yet all people are under an obligation before God to do good works. This obligation, however, is a “required obedience” not of the law, but to grace. It is not “up to the discretion of the reborn human beings to do good or not to do good as they wish” but it is expected of those who would remain in the Christian faith (Kolb 2000, 499). The imperfect nature of our good works and our lack of desire to do good works is a matter for repentance, but not for fear.

The Formula of Concord rejects the view “that good works are necessary for salvation; or that no one has ever been saved without good works; or that it is impossible to be saved without good works” (Kolb 2000, 499). The idea that good works would harm salvation is rejected as offensive. It is, rather, necessary that Christians be reminded to do good works. The article in the Epitome ends with a warning that persistent sin in rejection of good works could result in loss of salvation.

The Solid Declaration describes the controversy in a very similar way, though explaining the arguments of the different parties in more detail (Kolb 2000, 574). Much of the argument is alleged to be in reaction to opposing points of view. For instance, those who say that good works are not necessary but that Christians are free to do good works are reacting to a Roman Catholic perception that works contribute to salvation. Those who said that good works were harmful to Christianity were wishing to draw a clear distinction from those who would say that good works are necessary (Kolb 2000, 575).

The beginning of the positive statements in the Solid Declaration is particularly strong. “[T]here is no argument among our people on the following points: that it is God’s will, order, and command that believers shall walk in good works; that true good works are not those which people invent for themselves or that take their form according to human tradition but rather are those that God himself has prescribed and commanded in his Word; that true good works are not performed out of our own natural powers, but they are performed when a person is reconciled with God through faith and renewed through the Holy Spirit…” (Kolb 2000, 575). Thse good works are pleasing to God, though imperfect. The good works of the Christian spring from faith in God (Kolb 2000, 576).

The Augsburg Confession makes it clear in articles VI and XX, and in the Apology article IV, among other places, that Christians are required to do good works (Kolb 2000, 576). However, this does not indicate that the good works result in salvation. Rejecting good works is a giving of oneself over to sin. Holding a habit of sin can result in spiritual death, as we are actively disobeying the God who saved us (Kolb 2000, 577). This is unthinkable to the authors of the Solid Declaration. However, at the same time, the Scripture commands many things which are good and are not kept as a result of God’s coercive power. He requests that Christians engage in their good works willingly and cheerfully.

Again, it is important to avoid mixing the need for good works into the article on justification. The author rejects the idea “that good works are necessary for the salvation of believers or that it is impossible to be saved without good works” (Kolb 2000, 578).

Because of the firm rejection of good works leading to salvation, the Solid Declaration also takes pains to observe that the lack of good works can draw one away from Christ. In short, the lack of good works can and should be seen as a sin just like any other sin, which can divide the Christian from his savior and eventually rob him of his salvation (Kolb 2000, 579). Salvation, and the retention of salvation, are by faith alone. However, good works are a natural outcome of that faith. Faith is expressed through good works (Kolb 2000, 580).

Isaiah 35:4-7a - Lectionary for Pentecost 16B

9/4/2018

9/4/18
Many churches throughout the world use a Bible reading schedule called a "lectionary." It's just a fancy word meaning "selected readings." Posts like this reflect on the readings for an upcoming Sunday or other Church holiday, as found in the three-year lectionary.

Our Old Testament reading from Isaiah 35:4-7a brings encouragement to those who fear. I expect if we are honest with ourselves we can all name times when we had little or no hope. We felt overwhelmed. And in those situations we wanted to run and hide. This is why in verse 4 the person addressed is usually called “fearful” or “timid.” By the way, I do have to say that of all the translations I surveyed, the Christian Standard translation of “cowardly” seems the most extreme. Most of us could say we have never been cowards, but we can freely admit to being timid or frightened at times. Let’s stay there.

What hope do we have when we are afraid? Well, what do we normally do in our normal daily lives when we are afraid? We call upon help which can ease the fear. Sometimes that means we lock the door because there are sometimes criminals in our neighborhood. Sometimes that means we call for a friend or relative because we find safety in numbers, especially against the arachnid climbing up our walls. Sometimes we call the police, the doctor, or the lawyer. We need a special kind of help or protection that we wouldn’t have on our own. That’s what we do. We call out for help.

In Isaiah 35, God is the one who comes to the aid of his people. He brings “vengeance” or “retribution.” But let’s notice what kind of work that is. He makes the deaf hear. He makes the blind see. He brings speech to those who couldn’t speak. He makes the lame able to leap and dance. He provides water where there was none before. This doesn’t sound quite like the way we usually get vengeance. What’s God doing? He is correcting the situation which would cause us to call out for help. That’s all he is doing. He sees and understands our frailty. He knows what troubles us. He comes and takes care of it.

When we are in trouble, big trouble or little trouble, we can call out to God in Christ. He is ready to answer our call and take care of us in our trouble. He’s that kind of a God.

If this brief meditation was helpful to you, I hope you will check out the other materials on our website at www.WittenbergCoMo.com and consider supporting us.

The Search for Riches Often Leads Somewhere Else

9/4/2018

Tuesdays are for the Old Testament
9/4/18

Motyer, J. Alec. The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduction & Commentary. Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993. “Isaiah 1-37, part A, 1:1-5:30” Loc. 1163-2242.

Motyer observes that “A single theme binds the first thirty-seven chapters of Isaiah: the king who reigns in Zion” (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1164). Overall he sees this portion of Isaiah looking to a future state of affairs rather than the present. Chapters 1-5 set the stage as they describe a time of turmoil which needs relief (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1175). Motyer sketches the theme of various portions, then makes notes about the structure, seeing chapters 1-5 as prefatory (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1197). Chapters 6-12 and 28-35 are parallel in their content. Chapters 13-27 and 36-37 comment on the material coming immediately beforehand (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1207).

Chapters 1-5, curiously enough, come before the fairly elaborate call narrative in chapter 6. Motyer considers the material to be displaced purposely, used as an introduction, though the prophecies would have been received by Isaiah after his call (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1241). Chapters 2-4 are cohesive, themselves introduced and concluded by chapters 1 and 5 (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1246). Chapter 5 draws a conclusion that we have no hope of restoration in ourselves. It sets the stage for God’s intervention (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1271).

Chapter 1 emphasizes the experience of Judah as it has been broken by sin (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1288). The world is not simply mechanistic. God intervenes so as to prevent complete destruction as a result of human disobedience (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1302). At the same time, God uses nations which are hostile to him as his instruments to chastise Judah. In 1:10-20 it is clear that the religious failings of Judah have placed them in this position (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1374) Rather than encountering God in their worship, the people were encountering themselves (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1422). After correction, in verse 18 the people are given a judgment of forgiveness rather than the condemnation they might have expected (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1467). In response, rather than rejoicing, there is a lament over the loss of the glory of former days (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1487). The end of chapter one details the tension between God’s judgment and promised restoration (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1551).

Motyer points out that chapters 2-4 are also undated and not clearly tied to history. As with chapter one, the concept, not the time, is important (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1596). Chapter 2:2-4 also appears in Micah 4:1-4, both prophets in the same time and place (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1621). The theme is the restoration of Jerusalem and the place of God’s mercy (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1632). Jerusalem, currently the home of disorder, is called to repentance (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1664). Isaiah describes the disorder in considerable detail. The use of idols is the epitome of disorder. They cannot be depended on in any way (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1768). In a day of judgment they prove useless. Chapter 3 continues to show the failure of Jerusalem, but now its social, rather than religious, condition (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1784). The society has become one of greed and oppression, not of integrity. This, Motyer says, is a matter of God giving the society some of what it deserves (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1810). The people and their rulers are intent on plunder. God will serve as the judge in the end (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1909). Chapter 4 then treats of a coming day of the Lord. This is a day of restoration, counter to expectations (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1950). This restoration is pictured as a regrowth of God’s branch, or tree (Motyer 1993, Loc. 1968). Motyer observes several other types of imagery in chatper 4, such as washing, purifying by fire, and providing shelter.

Chapter 5 is the darkest portion of Isaiah’s introduction. Divine judgment is inevitable (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2041). God’s vineyard has been ruined (vv. 1-7), producing a bitter crop (vv. 8-30) (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2046). Though God has done everything to prepare for good, evil has come in the end. The specific outcomes are denounced individually (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2102). The people have pursued their own destruction regardless of any way in which God has cared for them. All this comes from human desire for autonomy (Motyer 1993, Loc. 2201). Not satisfied with the riches of God, we seek our own desires, which lead to ruin (5:20ff).