when our integrity is on the line, it is comforting to stand before God, depend on God’s relationship with each of us before we go out and face the not-so-forgiving world.”
in The Book of Psalms (Eerdmans, 2014)
As God’s people, meditating over the rich world of Psalm 26 can help us meet the challenges of this unforgiving world.
Genre and Context
Genre. Psalm 26 is a poetic prayer framed in the language of a plea of vindication, asking God to evaluate David’s commitment to the path of integrity. There are other genre suggestions made to account for the palatable sense of a legal complaint, or a priestly approach to God (26:6–8), a lament (26:1), or of its liturgical sensibilities for God’s people to approach God (26:6–8).
A complaint appeal to God seems, however, to be the most fitting literary form for the psalm. David implies throughout that his spiritual and moral integrity is under scrutiny, and explicitly invites the Lord’s assessment, confident that he will be found “on level ground” (26:12).
Context. There are nine psalms with the superscription (i.e., the headings) which reads, “Of David” (Psalms 25–28, 35, 37, 103, 138, 144). Although these are very ancient, they have never been thought of as inspired. They often provide ancient information about either its background (Psalm 51), its liturgical usage (“to the choirmaster,” Psalm 31), or its collection or authorship (Asaph, Psalm 80). “Of David” is so abbreviated and limited, Psalm 26 could be from any period of David’s life.
There are two additional ways to explore the context of individual psalms: their placement in the Psalter and internal references to other biblical themes. Psalm 26 is placed in Book 1 (Psalms 1–41) cataloging 37 Davidic psalms. The psalm also presumes an understanding of the priestly and sacrificial system (26:6–8), and the “path” of the righteous from Psalm 1.
Movements and Theology
Movements. The psalm clearly moves from the demand to be vindicated by God, with the declaration of having “walked in… integrity” (26:1) to the promise to “walk in … integrity” (26:12). The walk in integrity motif serves as an inclusio—two phrases serving as literary bookends. This is at the heart of the movement of the psalm. Once David’s past and present are vindicated by God’s refining fire of judgment, he promises to continue walking in integrity.
Our English translations do not always agree on how to divide these literary units but the most helpful way to see the movement of thought within the psalm is a five-part outline: (1) 26:1–3, (2) 26:4–5, (3) 26:6–8, (4) 26:9–10, and (5) 26:11–12. At the center of this outline are verses 6–8, which emphasize priestly preparation to stand in the presence of God (“Psalms” in The Transforming Word [ACU Press, 2009]). Clearly, David’s confidence in his innocence is not to be confused with a sense of sinlessness, for this reason, he pleads for redemption and grace (26:11b).
Theology. There are a few significant theological themes to soak in:
(1) A theology of vindication: In the opening invocation of God, David uses the verbal shopheteni (“vindicate me”; 26:1), a judicial term for “passing judgment.” It is used in the positive sense of “demonstrate my innocence.” The same phrase appears two other times: “Vindicate me, O Lord, My God” (35:24), and, “Vindicate me, O God, and defend my cause against ungodly people…” (43:1). Vindication of the righteous sufferer is a common theme throughout scripture (cf. Job; 1 Pet 2:18–25; Phil 2:5–11). David, too, insisted that God prove, try, and test his heart and mind (26:2).
(2) God’s Benevolent Faithfulness: Steadfast love (hesed) and faithfulness (‘emet) are found together fifty times in the Psalms. It affirms God’s character revealed at Mount Sinai: “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty…” (Exodus 34:6–7). As Jonah reluctantly learned, this God also exists for those outside of his covenant as well (Jonah 4:2). David knows his God prefers a redemptive relationship over penal punishment.
(3) The priestly approach: In Exodus 30:17–21, the priests who serve in the tabernacle (i.e., the Lord’s house; Psalm 26:8) must wash their hands and their feet in a bronze basin before entering, “so that they may not die” (17:21). Temple rituals for coming into the presence of God are often spiritualized by those outside the Levitical guild. David affirms that he appropriately prepares himself to be in God’s house since only by the grace of God do we have access to redemption, praise, and worship in his presence (Psalm 26:6–8, 11).
(4) The two paths: The first psalm establishes the two paths: the way of the righteous and the way of the wicked (Psalm 1:1, 4–6). The wicked and the righteous, and their deeds, are fully known by God; likewise, their fates are determined by their lifestyle. This theological framing is found in Psalm 26. David appeals to this language when he disavowed association with the wicked (26:5; 1:1), and in his request not to be lumped in among the sinners when God scoops them all together in judgment (26:9; 1:1, 5).
Application
It is hard to know the particular scenario in David’s life which gave rise to this psalm. The power of the inspired poetic form, however, is found in the accessibility of our contemporary settings despite the differences.
The integrity of God’s people will be challenged, but such an inspection should be welcomed if God’s people are seeking the way of the righteous in a humble, graceful, and redemptive way
Sources
Tanner, Beth LaNeel. “Psalm 26: Prepare to Appear” in DeClaissé-Walford, Nancy L., Rolf A. Jacobson, and Beth LaNeel Tanner. The Book of Psalms. NICOT Edited by E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2014.
Marrs, Rick R. “Psalms” in The Transforming Word One-Volume Commentary on the Bible. Edited by Mark W. Hamilton. Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, 2009.
In pursuit of my own spiritual growth (such as it is) as a man of faith, it took me a long time to figure out where my journey was supposed to find not just the goal, but the starting point and the road map for the pilgrimage. Spiritual growth is not the result of knowing where our faith calls us to, but from the arduous journey to get there.
My journey has been massively blessed. I have had mentors, mothers, fathers – at times, even grandparent – figures. They have all given me something for my journey (perhaps, sometime, I’ll write about that), but I was only walking with them on their journey. Still, I would not be where I am, spiritually, without them.
I tried education. I figured “if I could be smarter” then I could discover all of the secrets that others are keeping to themselves behind the walls of academia – the proverbial mountain top. I found the tools and methods instead to help me navigate “the strange and yet immanent” world of Scriptures. They helped me raise questions and look at God’s word from various new angles that have indeed helped me in my journey to God. Despite its benefits of making me feel closer to the text, however, it was not the “end all” solution to my spiritual needs.
My personal life experiences, training, and those mentors in my life, all pointed me back to one thing: my journey to God only makes sense when I invest in a lifestyle of discipleship that has a consequential impact on my life. This required me to take seriously the words of the Psalmists.
I needed my desire for wisdom to mirror the Psalmist’s outcry to the Lord:
Open my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law. (Psalm 119:18)[1]
In this great Psalm, David recounts the wonders of the Law of God and exalts its beauty, richness, guidance, and its loftiness as it is grounded in God’s righteousness. It begins with the words,
Blessed are those whose way is blameless, who walk in the law of the Lord! (Psalm 119:1)
One of the empowering aspects of this Psalm is not actually found in what is written, but in the very process by which we see the Psalmist’s love for living out the Word of God, the Law of the Lord. The entire Psalm flows with a powerful example of losing oneself in the world of God’s Law.
I am not at all surprised that Psalm 119 found a communal niche at the Feast of Pentecost, as Nancy deClaissé-Walford recounts:
It is recited at the Feast of Pentecost, the spring festival observed fifty days after Passover, which celebrates the giving of the torah to Moses at Sinai during the wilderness wanderings.[2]
Nancy deClaissé-Walford in The Book of Psalms (2014)
Psalm 119 called my attention to the only true path to spiritual growth: the transformative power of the world of the scriptures. Knowing God through the scriptures, however, must lead toward discipleship, toward obedience.
The Ezra Principle
The “Ezra Principle” sounds catchy and new doesn’t it. I guarantee you it is not. I have not discovered anything hidden in plain sight. In fact, the “principle” is not just one thing, but a commitment to five values of discipleship that Ezra pursued himself.
In the fifth century B.C. (c. 458 B.C.), Ezra is commissioned by the Persian King Artaxerxes I (465–424 B.C.) in his return to Jerusalem (7:1–28). It is a time of fresh opportunity to “get things right” following the seventy years of captivity in the Babylonian due to the corruptive influence of pagan idolatry.[3] In this context, Ezra had begun a process of preparation for the task before him:
Ezra had set his heart to study the Law of the LORD, and to do it and to teach his statutes and rules in Israel. (Ezra 7:10)
The grammarian in me is interested in the verbal phrases of Ezra’s commitment: (1) “set his heart,” (2) “to study the Law,” (3) “to do it,” and (4) “to teach… in Israel.” That’s powerful. You may find other ways to divide this passage, but we will separate “study” and its object, “the Law of the Lord,” into two values themselves.
This is one of those passages that made clear to me the connection between knowing God’s word and being an authentic follower of God: the connection between personal commitment to know and to do God’s word.
Knowledge and Discipleship
This observation shifted my thinking away from just being absorbed in the Word of God. Spiritual growth must embrace knowledge but that is not the entire picture. James warns us that a people of knowledge alone is useless if not insulting because knowledge (i.e., faith) is to demonstrate itself by good works (1:22-27).[4]
James weaves together the two themes of favoritism and faith in order to illustrate just how practical saving faith must be. He illustrates this by examining the relationship between the poor and the rich in the church:
If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, "Go in peace, be warmed and filled," without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? (Jas 2:15–16)
What good is knowing that we are all saved in Christ, so goes the argument, if we do not care for each other in this life? How does God’s communal redemption of all impact our daily interactions? James argues that knowledge (faith) should be lived out in the community of the body of Christ in consequential ways.
For that matter, think about the community where the church meets. What good are we doing if we are strong on truth, but our community has never heard or seen us live out what the gospel is all about? The good we do should move people that thank God:
In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven. (Matt 5:16)
In other words, spiritual knowledge and discipleship are inseparable.
To return to our point, knowing is only the beginning, the end is discipleship. The process from point A to point B is our journey of applying the narrative of Scripture (how God redeems humanity through Jesus Christ) to our lives so that we may be transformed by it (Rom 12:1-2). This makes the Word of God the essential guiding force behind all of our actions.
This brings us to the “main event” of this discussion: something I call the “Ezra Principle.”
(1) We Must Set Our Hearts
is one of the clearest descriptions of a targeted mindset in the OT. If the heart is not “into it” the body and life will not follow. Paul, speaking of the Macedonian’s benevolent efforts despite their deep poverty, describes the basis of their commitment: “they gave themselves first to the Lord, and then by the will of God to us” (2 Cor 8:5). Great advancements always stem from great commitments.
In the study and application of God’s Word, the commitment which begins at our spiritual core – the heart – will continue to be the driving force throughout our life of service to God (Deut 6:5, Lev 19:18).
(2) We Must Spend Time in Study.
Near the end of the apostle Paul’s life, he requested that Timothy come to be with him and bring his cloak, his books, and the parchments (2 Tim 4:13). There are many speculations about the nature of these last two items, but at the very least the books and parchments would include copies of his letters to other churches. Paul would spend the last days of his life with those volumes he penned through inspiration to those in need of strength and faith.
The point we draw from here is that Paul was a studying man. In fact, he would encourage Timothy to be well equipped in the word of God and aptly able to “divide” the Scripture clearly and carefully (2 Tim 2:15). Ezra likewise spent renewed focus on studying the Law as he found himself and Israel back in the Land of their faith. Ezra knew, as we ought to today, that in order to rebuild our lives it must be based upon God’s word.
(3) We Must Select Only God’s Word as the Object of our Study.
There are many philosophical writings and even religious “scriptures” in the world. They often have maxims, sayings, or verses with which we would agree and commend. When building a biblical worldview as for the foundation of our spiritual growth, however, the Bible is the only set of “Sacred Writings” which are able to make a person wise to obtain salvation (2 Tim 3:14-15).
One may argue that this is an arrogant statement; however, despite the fact that such “writings” may provide insight into our lives, they pale in comparison with the never surpassed guidance given in the divine books of the Bible.
When one analyzes the Bible from the vantage point of predictive prophecy, historical accuracy, scientific foreknowledge, and literary harmony of this great anthology of 66 books in contrast to such other works, the Bible stands alone.
(4) We Must Steadfastly Practice God’s Word.
It is only by the conviction that the words inscribed on the paper we read are not mere words of human beings, but are instead the very words that God himself would breathe out (1 Thess 2:13; 2 Tim 3:16–17). Jesus teaches quite clearly that our lives are to reflect this type of respect, for in our prayers we are to express the sentiment, “your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (Matt 6:10). The Lord declares: “to obey is better than sacrifice” (1 Sam 15:22)
(5) We Must Share both our Learning and Experiences.
In many ways, teaching is not only the sharing of facts and principles. In various instances, anecdotal interactions with God’s word can be very revealing and helpful in understanding and teaching God’s word. For example, consider all those who continue to leave the denominational world for the practice of pure New Testament Christianity.
The process of filtering out unbiblical accretions while adding to their learning and practicing the biblical faith can be a very helpful experience to teach others going through the same process. The bottom line is that God’s word was never designed to be a mental exercise to the exclusion of action and sharing; indeed, we must make “disciples” (Matt 28:19-20).
Steven Lawson, in his own words, calls attention to the advice of Walter Kaiser:
When a man preaches, he should never remove his finger from the Scriptures, Kaiser affirmed. If he is gesturing with his right hand, he should keep his left hand’s finger on the text. If he reverses hands for gesturing, then he should also reverse hands for holding his spot in the text. He should always be pointing to the Scriptures.[5]
S. J. Lawson, “The Pattern of Biblical Preaching,” Bibliotheca Sacra 158 (2001)
The advice is striking for those that proclaim the Word of God, but it is an excellent reminder to those would-be disciples interested in taking their discipleship to the next level, namely, to be teachers.
Studying is Complicated
This may seem like an aside, but it is not. I promise. We need to be very careful how we use scripture. Sometimes there are narratives regarding God’s people which seem contrary to the high moral calling which is expected of God’s leaders or people. Historical narratives need to be read with caution, as they often make their points indirectly (with no commentary). They are not always telling us something God wants us to imitate, but what God’s people have done.[6] It teaches me to be careful when seeking to “do” and “teach” God’s word.
I have often wrestled with some of the deeds of Ezra as recorded in the sacred record, particularly the covenant he seems to have initiated among the returning exiled Jews to “put away” all their foreign wives and children (cf. Ezra 10). Was this divorce en-masse commissioned by God? If one takes the view that whatever is written is positive teaching, as an authoritative command, then the text seemingly gives justification to divorce and remarriage on the count of practicing a different faith. This seems counter to the teaching of Jesus who affirms that there is only one justifiable cause for divorce and remarriage: adultery (Matt 19:1–9).
Yet, if one takes the view that each action must be taken into consideration on its own merits, then it is possible that Ezra was convicted by the significant teaching against inter-marriage with foreigners due to their influence on their spiritual corruption (Exod 34:12–16; Deut 7:1–6; Josh 23:19–23) that he overstepped its application and persuaded the men of Israel to do something not commanded of those who were already “married with children.” This would align with the fact that there is no explicit commentary nor “word from the Lord” to demand these families to be severed.
Providing an answer to this riddle is beyond the purpose of this essay. My point is in our commitment to setting the heart, studying the word, and living out the word in our individual lives, the weight of teaching is likewise an important discipline that should be taken with the heavy responsibility that comes with it.
The Lord’s brother James wrote:
Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. For we all stumble in many ways. And if anyone does not stumble in what he says, he is a perfect man, able also to bridle his whole body. (James 3:1–2)
Humility must always accompany study and teaching (Rom 2:1–11).
Final Thoughts
I am forever grateful for those who took the time to encourage me, prod me, and guide me to appreciate the special place Bible study is in the spiritual life and growth of God’s people. I would like to give a quick hat tip to them at the close of this essay.
Donald W. Hinds (1922–2008) taught me and encouraged me to read daily and widely, to be challenged by what I read, and to meditate carefully on it. His son David Hinds taught me the importance of finding the right book and the right teacher (author), in that some have so prepared themselves that if I should listen to other voices beyond the Bible, I should find such authors. I am thankful to Wayne Jackson (1961–2017), a true preacher’s preacher, who probably shaped my passion for the study of the Scriptures more so than anyone else in my early formative years through his writings in biblical studies (The Christian Courier), biblical apologetics (Apologetics Press, Inc.), and while a member of the church where he richly and profoundly proclaimed the scriptures.
Others have guided me along the way as well. Earl D. Edwards was one of my instructors in college, an elder in the church while I attended college, and a personal mentor during my early academic development. In him, I saw how the power of God’s word can so shape a man’s life with dignity, scholarship, and humility.
I wish I could say more about others, but I’ll save that for another time. These are but a few personal encounters with those who have lived out and assisted me to see that the “Ezra Principle” is not a “cute” title, but essential for the spiritual formation that comes from following God and his word. I pray that you take its challenge.
Endnotes
Unless cited otherwise, all Scripture quotations are from the English Standard Version of The Holy Bible (Wheaton, Ill: Crossway, 2016).
Nancy deClaissé-Walford, “Book Five of the Psalter: Psalms 107–150,” in The Book of Psalms, NICOT, eds. E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, and Robert L. Hubbard Jr. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2014), 870.
M. J. Boda, “Ezra,” Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 278.
Craig L. Blomberg and Mariam J. Kamell, James, ZECNT, ed. Clinton E. Arnold (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2008), 101.
Steven J. Lawson, “The Pattern of Biblical Preaching: An Expository Study of Ezra 7:10 and Nehemiah 8:1–18,” BSac 158 (2001): 451.
I am reminded of an “authorized” campus flyer I came across advertising a community college course on “The Bible as Literature” at the City College of San Francisco. It had a picture of the Bible with a sticker label on it that read:
—- WARNING: This is a work of fiction. Do not interpret literally.
CONTENT ADVISORY: Contains verses descriptive of or advocating suicide, incest, bestiality, sadomasochism, rape, murder, morbid violence, use of drugs or alcohol, homosexuality, criminal activity, human rights violations, and crimes against humanity.
EXPOSURE WARNING: Exposure to contents for extended periods or during formative years in children has been known to cause delusions, hallucinations, decreased cognitive and objective reasoning abilities, and in extreme cases, pathological disorders, hatred, bigotry, and violence including, but not limited to torture, murder, and genocide. —-
Are there stories in Scripture that record horrific events? Yes. Are they documented to promote such behavior? No. They are recorded to document the fallen nature of the world we live in.
In 1873 a manuscript was discovered by Philotheus Bryennios at Constantinople dating from the mid-11th century (AD 1056), though its tradition is believed to be of much earlier origin.[1] Due to certain political problems it was not published for ten years; however, once it began to be studied the Didache became generally known as “being the most important literary discovery in patrology made in the nineteenth century.”[2]
In fact, “the Didache (‘The Teaching’), as it is usually known today, is a ‘handbook,’ or manual of Christian ethical instruction and church order.”[3] It is believed that such instruction was offered to each candidate for church membership prior to baptism.
Although the text maintains a basic “literary unity,” the divergent interests and approaches of the materials strongly suggest, “more than one writer is at work here.”[4] One the one hand, the vocabulary and grammar is not extremely difficult; on the other hand, the theological insights from this early Christian document can become complex, particularly when a reconstructed community is conceptualized.
Exegesis of the Greek Text
8.1 (And) let your fasts not stand with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and on the fifth day of the week, but you fast during the fourth day and during the Sabbath preparation day.[5]
The instruction logically moves from the prior discussion of baptism and the new converts’ requirement of fasting, to a capsulated discussion of fasting and prayer. Draper disagrees, affirming that Didache 8.1-3 is an “interruption to the logical progression of the liturgical section of Didache, in which baptism is followed by the Eucharist.”[6] However, Αἱ δὲ νηστεῖαι ὑμῶν μὴ ἔστωσαν μετὰ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν begins with the post-positive δὲ, connecting the logical flow between 7.1-4 and 8.1-3, and should not be viewed as adversative nor as an interruption.[7] Instead, it is a necessary discussion in connection with prospective converts.
The fasts (Αἱ + νηστεῖαι) are the first concern of this chapter, and they are particular fasts – they belong to the readers (ὑμῶν) who are preparing for baptism (Did. 7.4). This is the genitive of possession. The fasts that they are to perform must be expressly free from hypocrisy; moreover, this conclusion is drawn from μὴ ἔστωσαν μετὰ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, where the author(s) of the Didache prohibit fasting (thus, an imperatival prohibition) that is μετὰ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν. This prepositional phrase is very descriptive, for it describes “the company in which an activity or experience takes place”; hence, the readers must refrain from joining the group of “hypocrites” (whoever they may be) when they fast.[8]
The prohibition against joining the hypocrites is given specificity by the post-positive γὰρ where it functions as a guide to understanding how to refrain from joining the company of hypocrites when fasting and praying. There seems to be more to the usage of γὰρ than at first glance. If it were simply a matter of explaining that the hypocrites fast on certain days of the week then this conjunction is unnecessary; however, it makes more sense that it takes on a “guide-to-an-ethical-methodology” based upon a cause for the instruction, even if it is too focused upon externals (i.e. specific days of the week).[9] It leads the potential converts to a methodology that allows them to avoid fasting which “coincides with those of the hypocrites” – μετὰ τῶν ὑποκριτῶν (Did. 8.1).[10] In order to express this ethical instruction, Robert Kraft renders the section, “do not let your fasts fall on the same day as ‘the hypocrites.’”[11]
The teacher(s) explain how these prospective converts can avert fasting in the same company as the hypocrites, by explaining that the hypocrites in question fast (νηστεύουσι; present of fact) on δευτέρα σαββάτων καὶ πέμπτῃ.[12] There is considerable discussion regarding who these hypocrites are. On the one hand, most see this as a reference to Pharisees because of the parallel instruction of Jesus in Matt 6:16-18; meanwhile, on the other hand, it is viewed as a reference to Christian Jews who are still partial to the pharisaical traditions.[13]
Aaron Milavec spends considerable time evaluating the evidence for the former, and argues heavily that Matthew and the Didache use the term hypocrisy differently and there is no solid evidence within rabbinic sources that the Pharisees distinguished themselves by fasting.[14] Furthermore, “when Did. 8.1 is compared with Matthew, one quickly detects that the Didache has an agenda and an internal logic quite distinct from that of Matthew’s Gospel.”[15] Be that as it may, from a grammatical and linguistic approach it is inconsequential. The fact of the matter is, the hypocrites fast on δευτέρα σαββάτων καὶ πέμπτῃ, and it is these days that are to be avoided by the soon-to-be-baptized-reader. These days are the second (δεύτερος)[16] and the fifth (πέμπτος)[17] days of the week (σάββατον[18]).
The reader learning which days to avoid is then given a glance into the future (cf. future tense of νηστεύσατε), where they see the days of the week they are going to designate for fasting (τετράδα καὶ παρασκευήν). This idiom for days of the week has been also clarified by Kraft as “Wednesday and Friday,”[19] but such is unnecessary. Consequently, Milavec’s translation is preferred. The post-positive δὲ is adversative, moving away from the days “the hypocrites” occupy for fasting, the δὲ functions to enhance the reader’s understanding that they are to take on the new ethic imposed by the future, but imperative in force, νηστεύσατε (you will fast).
8.2a (And) do not pray as the hypocrites but as the Lord ordered in his good news.
As is characteristic of the imperative, the verb assumes its own subject, being the person(s) who are either to do the express action of the verb, or if negated avoid the action of the verb. Here, there is another negated imperative (μηδὲ προσεύχεσθε) “you are not to pray […]”; however, the idea is incomplete because syntactically it is connected to ὡς οἱ ὑποκριταί “just as the hypocrites.” The idea of “praying” is supplemented by the phrase “just as the hypocrites”; hence, it can be argued that οἱ ὑποκριταί is functioning in an adverbial capacity to μηδὲ προσεύχεσθε. It goes without saying that praying is not what is being denied; instead, and more to the point, it is the type of praying characteristic of the hypocrites which is being denied.
“The hypocrites” almost serve as a biblical caricature of examples of how not to commune with God as a public servant of God (Matt 6:5-7). “The hypocrites” almost serve as a biblical caricature of examples of how not to commune with God as a public servant of God (Matt 6:5-7). Little wonder, that the author(s) contrast this how the prospective converts are not to pray, with a citation to the Gospel of the Lord (ὁ κύριος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ αὐτοῦ).
This is perhaps the strongest argument that the Pharisees are seen as being equivalent to “the hypocrites”; however, there is no need to be literal since even the name Pharisee can be used figuratively for hypocrites. Be that as it may, the context of the Lord’s admonitions regarding prayer, as particular in Matthew, which has the high verbal agreement with Did. 8.2, has made Pharisee and hypocrite equivalent terms. The main rationale for the Lord’s condemnation is that they make public displays of religious devotion “to be seen by men” (Matt 6:5).
The contrasting ἀλλ’ emphasizes the transition from what not to do, towards the recommended orthodoxy, which is based upon an authoritative tradition. The ground for the moral instruction on prayer is what the Lord commands: ὡς ἐκέλευσεν ὁ κύριος ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ αὐτοῦ. This translates, “as the Lord commanded in his Gospel [or gospel message, good news]”; commanded, ἐκέλευσεν (+ dative), stresses the fact that Jesus himself required the fundamental aspects of proper prayer in his teaching ministry.[20] It is not just theoretical, the instruction may be found in the Lord’s Gospel (or gospel message, good news).
The phrase ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ αὐτοῦ, within itself does not demand that the command is dependent upon a written source especially since it has its divergences.[21] In fact, several scholars believe the following prayer is, though having strong parallels with Matthew 6:9-13,[22] an independent tradition and may have been relied upon by Matthew.[23]
8.2b Pray thus: Our Father, the one in heaven, your name be made holy, you kingdom come, your will be born upon earth as in heaven,
The phrase οὕτω προσεύχεσθε is the resulting imperative calling attention to the reader that they are to “offer prayers” in a certain fashion. The fashion is very closely paralleled with Matthew; however, as Lake discusses there are four divergences between Matthew and the Didache: τῷ οὐρανῷ, τὴν ὀφειλὴν, ἀφίεμεν, and the doxology ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας.[24] It takes the totality of Did. 8.1-3 for Lake to affirm:
These three sections, on fasting, on prayer, on the Lord’s Prayer, cannot be separated from each other. They point at least to similar local conditions; but the two former rather weaken the probability that the Lord’s Prayer is a direct quotation from our Matthew.[25]
Kirsopp Lake, The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (1905)
What these differences between Matthew and the Didache suggest is, according to Lake, is nothing too substantive, they simply point to a more complex study of dependency. On this issue Milavec’s investigation on this particularly complex issue led him to conclude that there is no necessary proof that one borrowed from the other.[26] Similarly, according to Lake, these differences between Matthew and the Didache point to a broader sense of dependency (i.e., oral, proverbial) since vocabulary similarities and divergences, and the omission of similar Matthean tensions are absent, and so “the proverbial character of the saying reduces the weight which must be attached to verbal similarity.”[27]
The prepositional phrase ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ functions as an adjective to ὁ “the one,” suggesting a prepositional phrase functioning in the attributive position; hence, just as ὁ ἄγγελος ὁ καλός translates “the good angel” or “the angel, namely the good one” the opening part of this prayer is attributive in structure: “Our Father [vocative Πάτερ], the one, namely in heaven.” The prayer Did. 8.2b.3 parallels the aorist imperative verbals of Matthew 6:9c-10:
Didache 8.2
Matthew 6:9c-10
Translation (AT)
ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου
ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου
your name be sanctified
ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου
ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου
let your kingdom arrive,
γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου
γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου
your desire come to pass,
ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς
ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς
as in heaven so also on earth
Chart: Textual Parallels
The verbal parallels are striking. However, the usage of this tradition is different in its scope when compared to Matthew’s purpose of this prayer. The Didache has more of a liturgical and ceremonial baptismal preparations, emphasizing the specific wording of the prayer. Jesus, on the others hand, encouraged a well-balanced spiritual and personal prayer life anchored in intimacy with God rather than public fanfare (Matt 6:5-6).[28]
From the perspective of Matthew’s Gospel, the three sets of imperatival verbs are particularly interesting, each bearing a unique concept.[29] Following Jack P. Lewis’ observation, it is clear that the first is clearly a benediction of God greatness (ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου), the second, stresses a recognition of God’s sovereignty (ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου), and the third, accepts God’s will in any area it is to be accomplished (γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου). It is difficult, therefore, not to impose Matthew’s contextual message upon the Didache; however, because there is a liturgical purpose for this prayer, it does stand in contradistinction to Matthew’s use.
Principally, observe that while Matthew stresses a spiritually fresh prayer life and expression (Matt 6:5-8), as opposed to endless repetitions of words (6:7-8), the Didache actually encourages repetition (Did. 8.3). Draper argues extensively that the community responsible for the final form of the Didache emphasizes external matters of purity for the purpose of maintaining public purity. Draper writes, “the instructions provide for Christian behaviour [sic] in the crucial and public areas of fasting and prayer which would differentiate them from their opponents.”[30]
8.2c give us this day our loaf that is coming, and forgive us our debt at the final judgment as we likewise now forgive our debtors,
In the analysis of this particular section of the Didache prayer, it is noticeable that there are two changes from the Matthew prayer of the Lord. Following the research of Milavec, the theological scope and worldview changes possibly towards a more focused eschatological perspective.[31] It is significant that the verbs in the petitions of the Didache prayer are all aorist imperatives, even the ones paralleled to Matthew (paralleled: ἁγιασθήτω, ἐλθέτω, γενηθήτω, δὸς, ἄφες, ῥῦσαι, and one divergent form ἀφήκαμεν). Milavec makes an eschatological argument, and suggests that all the aorist imperatives suggesting a one-time future action on the part of God must be eschatological in scope.[32]
Consequently, images such as bread (τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν) and eating are metonymy for a banquet in the kingdom (Luke 6:21, 14:15, 22:29-30; Matt 8:11; Rev 7:16).[33] Forgiveness within and for the Christian community is, in the Didache prayer, a future promise rather than a present reality and will be judged as a single action.[34] The pressing matter, however, is not to prove or disprove if the Matthew prayer reflects similar nuances in its eschatology. It is enough to understand that the Didache community was firmly aware of their eschatological worldview.
8.2d-3 and do not lead us into the trial of the last days but deliver us from that evil because your is power and the glory forever. [8.3] Three times within the day pray thus.
This is the final appeal in the aorist construction; however, in this case, the Didache prayer appears to digress from Milavec’s thesis regarding the aorist imperative stressing an eschatological outlook. Specifically, εἰσενέγκῃς is a subjunctive. The distinction within itself does not rule out the larger eschatological implications raised by Milavec, especially since ῥῦσαι, “you are to deliver,” is an aorist imperative verb. Milavec approaches the phrase, καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, and argues that since all the other Aorist Imperatives demand a one time eschatological fulfillment, then it follows this aorist subjunctive still finds resolution in the over arching argument.[35]
The contrastive ἀλλὰ blusters Milavec’s argument since what is really being pleaded for is deliverance from evil (ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ), not the pastoral hand of God shepherding his children from πειρασμόν (trials). However, what Milavec finds as evidence for a tribulation, can be potentially argued for as praying with an eschatological worldview, where these Aorist Imperatives – since they are timeless – may view the person’s life until the eschatological end.[36]
One of the unique parts of this section of the Didache 8.2 is the doxology, which is its major divergence from the Matthean prayer. As Kirsopp Lake stingingly remarks:
The peculiar form of the doxology does not agree exactly with any of the forms known to occur in the authorities for the text of Matthew.
Kirsopp Lake, The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (1905)[37]
This has been the continued opinion of the editors of the eclectic Greek Testament texts that the Matthean prayer ends with πονηροῦ. Bruce Metzger observes that the major textual witnesses are late which include the doxology (9th century), the major textual witnesses which omit the doxology are early, and the witnesses which include it are not uniform and appear to be intentional expansion of the prayer when reappropriated for external liturgical use (as in The Didache, etc.).[38] Thus, the association of this doxology with Matthew’s prayer is ancient but it does not have the textual support to be included in the body of the prayer (contra the KJV and Received Text traditions for Matthew 6:13b).
At any rate, the shift given by ὅτι in a very practical sense closes the petitions offered by the potential convert, who acknowledges that “the power and glory belong” to the Father “into the depths of eternal.” The author(s) of the Didache return to their orthodox imperatival thrust: “You will pray like this three times a day.” The present imperative προσεύχεσθε returns the instructive balance to this section of the Didache which continues its “catechism” training for the one interested in joining the Christian community associated with this manual.
Conclusion
In summation, the Didache is a profound find in the field of Patristic Studies, providing insights into the community or communities to which it addressed. The syntax and vocabulary is not at all particularly difficult, it appears to be written at a very basic level.
The section examined demonstrated that there was a strong desire for the early Christians to visibly and practically be separate from any public association with hypocrites. Not even the days of the potential convert could or should coincide with the days which hypocrites fast upon. The references and citations of traditions found within the New Testament (quotations probable but not always necessary), coupled with the possible “new slant” contextualized by the author(s), brings a theological complexity that must be sifted and sorted out before a proper exegesis of the sections can be accomplished.
Endnotes
Dates have ranged from AD 70, late second century, and even the third century; however, Kraft suggests that a secure date is the sometime within the fourth century somewhere near Egypt (Robert A. Kraft, “Didache” ABD 2:197).
Francis X. Glimm, “The Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles,” The Fathers of the Church, ed. R. Joseph Deferrari (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of American Press, 1969), 167-68.
Michael W. Holmes, “Didache” DLNT 300.
Clayton N. Jefford, Kenneth J. Harder, and Louis D. Amezaga, Reading the Apostolic Fathers: An Introduction (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 35.
The translation in the headings is taken from Aaron Milavec, The Didache: Faith, Hope, and Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50-70 C.E. (New York: Newman, 2003). Other translations will be noted. All uncredited translations are my own (AT).
Jonathan A. Draper, “Christian Self-Definition Against the ‘Hypocrites’ in Didache 8,” Society of Biblical Literature 1992 Seminar Papers, ed. Eugene H. Lovering, Jr. (Atlanta, GA: Scholars, 1992), 364.
The primary Greek text used for this study is from Michael Holmes, ed., The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2004), and Kirsopp Lake, The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, LCL (London: Heinemann, 1919).
BDAG 637.
BDAG 189.
Holmes, Apostolic Fathers, 259.
Kraft, “Barnabas and the Didache,” 165.
Kraft translates this expression as: “Monday and Thursday” (“Barnabas and the Didache,” 165), but we follow Milavec’s lead due to his literalness. Kraft’s translation does bring this idiom into modern parlance. It is preferable to leave it as is (Milavec), since it can be understood apart from accommodation to modern convention similarly done in the New Testament (Matt 28:1-2; Mark 16:1-3; Acts 20:7; 1 Cor 16.1-2).
Glimm, “The Didache,” 177.
Milavec, The Didache: Faith, Hope, and Life, 301-03.
Milavec, 302.
Did. 2.1 uses a similar expression, “the second commandment of the teaching is […]” (Holmes, Apostolic Fathers, 252); that is, this is the second of a series of commandments.
Moulton and Milligan provide an example of this sequential use: “showing the housing conditions of the time, we may cite P Fay 3115 (c. a.d. 129) where a woman applies to the keepers of the archives at Arsinoe for leave to alienate πέμπτον μέρος, “the fifth part” of certain house property belonging to her” (MM 502).
BDAG lists both the singular and plural forms of σάββατον referring to a period of seven days, and any numeral connected to it represent that particular day of the week (910).
Kraft, “Barnabas and the Didache,” 165.
MM (340) lists the aorist active indicative κελεύω + the dative construction rare and list one New Testament example from the Received Greek Text and the King James Version of Matthew 15:35 (κελεύω + dative), whereas, the UBS4 reads παραγγείλας. The sense of urging to the point of a command is reasonable in such cases.
Kirsopp Lake, “Didache,” in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford: Clarendon, 1905), 28-29. As will be developed in this paper, Lake observes a noticeable dependence of Did. 8 on Matthew 6 along with variations.
Glimm points out that Matthew 6:9-13 and the Did. 8.2 agree against the parallel passage in Luke 11:2-4 (“The Didache,” 178).
Draper, “Christian Self-Definition,” 632. Milavec has argued convincingly that despite their similarities, they are not enough when considering the influence of orality within the early church; furthermore, the divergences of theological emphases between Matthew and Didache argue against dependence (The Didache: Faith, Hope, and Life, 694-739).
Lake, “Didache,” 29.
Lake, “Didache,” 29.
Milavec, The Didache: Faith, Hope, and Life, 695-739.
Lake, “Didache,” 27.
Jack P. Lewis, The Gospel According to Matthew (Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, 1984), 2:101.
Lewis, Matthew, 2:101-02.
Draper, “Christian Self-Definition,” 374.
Aaron Milavec, The Didache: Text, Translation, Analysis, and Commentary (Collegeville: Liturgical, 2003), 66.
Milavec, The Didache: Text, 65.
Milavec, 66.
Milavec, 66.
Milavec, 66.
Milavec, 66.
Lake, “Didache,” 29.
Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2d ed. (Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2001), 13-14.
Selected Bibliography
(BDAG) Bauer, Walter, F. W. Danker, William F. Arndt, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature. 3rd edition. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Draper, Jonathan A. “Christian Self-Definition Against the ‘Hypocrites’ in Didache 8.” Society of Biblical Literature 1992 Seminar Papers 31. Edited by Eugene H. Lovering, Jr. Atlanta, GA: Scholars, 1992.
Glimm, Francis X. Translator. “The Didache or Teaching of the Twelve Apostles.” Pages 165-84 in vol. 1 of The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation. Edited by R. Joseph Deferrari. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1969.
Holmes, Michael W. Editor. The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations. Revised edition. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 2004.
_____. “Didache, The.” Pages 300-02 in Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Development. Edited by Ralph P. Martin and Peter H. Davids. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1997.
Jefford, Clayton N., Kenneth J. Harder, and Louis D. Amezaga. Reading the Apostolic Fathers: An Introduction. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003.
Kraft, Robert A. “Barnabas and the Didache.” In vol. 3 of The Apostolic Fathers: A New Translation and Commentary. Edited by Robert M. Grant. New York: Nelson, 1965.
_____. “Didache.” Anchor Bible Dictionary. Vol. 2. Edited by David Noel Freedman. New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Lake, Kirsopp. The Apostolic Fathers. Vol. 1. LCL. Edited by E. Capps, T. E. Page, and W. H. D. Rouse. London: Heinemann, 1919.
_____. “Didache.” Pages 24-36 in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers. Oxford: Clarendon, 1905.
Lewis, Jack P. The Gospel According to Matthew. Vol. 1. LWCNT 2. Edited by Everett Ferguson. Abilene, TX: Abilene Christian University Press, 1984.
Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament. 2d edition. Germany: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2001.
Milavec, Aaron. The Didache: Faith, Hope, and Life of the Earliest Christian Communities, 50-70 C.E. New York: Newman, 2003.
_____. The Didache: Text, Translation, Analysis, and Commentary. Collegeville: Liturgical, 2003.
(MM) Moulton, James H., and George Milligan. Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. 1930. Repr., Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997.
(UBS4) Aland, Barbara, et al. Editors. Greek New Testament. 4th revised edition. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2001.
The word Bible is a transliteration of the Greek bíblos, meaning “book, writing.” In the New Testament, the word has a range of applications that refer to sacred and important literary roles, written documents we would call “books” today (Mark 12:26; Phil 4:3, Acts 19:19, Matt 1:1).[1] It seems embarrassingly simplistic but the Bible means “the Book,” probably in the sense of, “the Book par excellence.” It speaks to us God’s Word, it tells us God’s story of the creation of the world and the pursuit of His fallen creation to bring about reconciliation through Jesus Christ.
At times it is easy to put the Bible aside and replace its intended centrality for our spiritual nourishment with other spiritual disciplines. Worship and praise, although an important discipline and expression, do not nourish the soul with transformative power the way the Bible does. Doing good in the community is detached from its purpose and mediation of the kingdom of God when ignorant of the biblical story and message imprinted on its pages.
For this reason, I’d like to focus briefly on three points. First, God intended for his revelation to be put into a written—durative—form that would extend beyond its original setting down to you and me, and beyond. Second, God intended for his word to provide standardized teaching to transform the believer and the lost seeker. Third, God’s word is what shapes God’s people into a faithful and vibrant community where the gospel is embraced and enacted.
The Durative Written Word
Several years ago, Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix made the argument that while God could have used angelic revelations, visions, and dreams, moral “oughtness,” or direct divine communication and intervention, God chose a permanent method to dispense his teaching and will – “the time-tested superiority of a written record of truth.”[2]
The value of a written record, particularly a religiously written record, is seen in Geisler and Nix’s concluding argument:
A written record has one additional advantage as well, namely, it can stimulate memory and conjure up within the individual’s imagination a host of personal implications that are latent within the given symbols or words of that record. Words, then, are not wooden as to prevent a “personal blessing” for the individual reader, particularly in light of the fact that biblical words are the objective vehicle through which the Holy Spirit applies truth personally and subjectively to each reader individually (cf. John 16:13; 1 Pet 1:11).[3]
Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, rev. ed. (Moody, 1986), emph. added.
The Bible, then, is a written record –a durative witness– to the life and teaching of Jesus Christ.
A life that existed in eternity, was revealed in the sinless life of a human servant of God, and fully demonstrated to be divine in the death and resurrection of himself, Jesus of Nazareth (John 1:1–3, 14; Phil 2:5–8; 1 Tim 3:16; Rom 1:1–4). This is a permanent record of the Greatest Story Ever Told.
A Pattern of Teaching
What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness. (Romans 6:15–18 ESV)[4]
In a section focused on the conversion process (Rom 6), the apostle Paul frames it in terms of “dead to sin and alive to God.” Under the parody of death to slavery which releases one from “ownership” and then by means of a resurrection to life —legally free from slavery— Paul argues that one legally enters into voluntary slavery (Rom 6:15–19).[5] It is here that Paul rejoices:
thanks be to God. that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching [typos didachēs] to which you were committed. (Rom 6:17)
It is here that a particular phrase emerges — “the standard of teaching [typos didachēs].”
Some feel that since Paul typically uses typos (standard, example, molding, etc) “is personal in nature” as in the following list:
Adam in Romans 5:14.
Paul and company in Philippians 3:17 and 2 Thessalonians 3:9.
The Thessalonians church in 1 Thessalonians 1:7.
The conduct of Timothy (1 Tim 4:12) and the good works of Titus (Tit 2:7).
If so, then it is “highly probable” that Romans 6:17 is a personal reference to Jesus.[6]
On the other hand, it has been argued that Paul means typos in its metaphoric use as a molding and hence normative teaching which “shapes the [Christian’s] whole personal conduct” once obedient to it.[7] So which is it? Are we forced to make a hard-line distinction between these two proposals?
I do not think so, for they are too intimately connected at the theological capillaries. First, Jesus despite being an actual person is the incarnate Word. Thus, when one submits to the word of God, one is submitting to Jesus as the complete exposition of God’s revelation.
Second, when one submits to the teaching of the gospel and is formed by it, one is being formed and fashioned by Jesus. It seems that one should not try to split hairs here since to submit and to be fashioned by the One is to submit and to be fashioned by the other. And so, we can agree with Harrison when he says,
Though Paul had not founded the church, he could be confident that whoever did had taken the trouble to give teaching upon which he himself could build as he wrote his letter. This in itself presupposes a rather fixed norm of instruction.[8]
Everett F. Harrison, “Some Patterns of the New Testament Didache,” BSac 119 (1962)
The concept of normative instruction is found throughout the biblical record. This supports our position that God intended to leave behind a reliable and trustworthy record of his message.
The Living and Active Word
Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by the same sort of disobedience. For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And no creature is hidden from his sight, but all are naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must give account. (Heb 4:11–13)
I have always found this passage to be troubling. It is troubling because it is straightforward but surrounded by a perplexing description of the “word of God” (4:12).
But first, consider the context of this passage (Heb 3:1–4:13). Thematically, (a) the author elevates Jesus as one who is faithful to his appointment by God as a son over God’s house, a house which is built by God, which the writers says “we are” (3:1–6). (b) As a consequence (therefore), the writer calls the Holy Spirit’s message from Psalm 95:7b–11 a warning to members of this house to be faithful to God’s voice. Concepts such as rebellion, provocation, hardened hearts, and God’s promise of reward or punishment, rest or disbarment from divine granted rest (3:7–19).
(d) The principles of Psalm 95 are brought to a conclusion in an appeal to fear lest any should seem to have failed to reach rest (4:1–10). The writer presses, then, a connection between Israelite failure and Hebrew Christian failure to enjoy the rest; one by means of unbelief (3:19), the other by means of disobedience (4:7). Yet, in all of this, there is a desire to create an environment of obedience of faith where confidence and hope thrive (4:2; 10; 3:6). (e) Finally, the last section (4:11–13) adds an additional conclusion to the reasoning begun in 3:1. The exhortation is to enter the rest promised by the Divine edict, and the explanatory words of “falling” in the wilderness before rest are implied. The writer then connects this exhortation with the implied method of obedience by accepting our heavenly calling to listen to the Word of God (3:1; 4:12).
It needs to be observed that “the author speaks to all the readers but focuses on a concern that ‘any one’ of them fall short: the concern here is not an individual achievement but rather that ‘the people of God’ reach its goal intact” (emph. mine).[9] The word of God then has an integral role to play in the communal faithfulness of God’s people. Its capacity to meet this goal is outlined in four ways.
Luke Timothy Johnson provides an excellent discussion of these descriptions:[10]
The word of God is living (zōn). “Hebrews applies the same quality of life that is normally associated with God’s being to God’s word.”
The word of God is active (engergēs). “The translation ‘active’ (see RSV) is certainly possible, but while it captures well the sense of ‘energy,’ it fails to capture the nuance of ‘power.’”
The word of God is sharper than two-edged swords. “The sharpness of the blade is revealed by its ability to cut to “the division between soul and spirit, joints and marrow.”
The word of God discriminates between thoughts and conceptions of the heart. “As with ‘soul and spirit, joints and marrow,’ the discernment between thought and conception is the more impressive because the difference between them is so slight and unavailable to human perception.”
If the church is to move in the direction of its mission and its calling, it must embrace the “deep tissue” work of the word of God to actively expose the areas that are strong and those areas that require Divine accountability and transformation.
Concluding Thoughts
Let us never ignore the great breadth and extent of the Word of God. God speaks in broad and generic terms through creation (Psa 19:1–2; Rom 1:20–21). God spoke through the oral preaching of prophets and apostles in the past. God spoke to selected individuals through dreams and visions. And most clearly, and finally, God has spoken through the very image of the Divine, Jesus Christ (Heb 1:1–3). Nevertheless, it is the sacred writings that Paul says we know of salvation and spiritual formation (2 Tim 3:10–17). Why? Because it is the very breath of God in a durative written record that provides us the pattern of the gospel message that makes us Christians and Christians only.
Endnotes
James Hope Moulton and George Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1930), 111.
Norman L. Geisler and William E. Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, rev. ed. (Chicago, IL: Moody, 1986), 323.
Geisler and Nix, A General Introduction, 324.
All Scripture quotations are taken from the English Standard Version of The Holy Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016) unless otherwise stated.
Francis Lyall, “Legal Metaphors in the Epistles,” TynB 32 (1981): 87.
Everett F. Harrison, “Some Patterns of the New Testament Didache,” Bsac 119 (1962): 120.
Hardships come in all shapes and sizes. They often harden the people that survive them. Sometimes we are surrounded by so many troubles, their downpour is palpable. Our political climate resides on a hairpin trigger; any response to the “pandemic” seemly places you at odds with various camps at once.
There is remote education, remote working, adjusted schedules, reduced workforce and its accompanying reduced income and on we may go. Never have we had to adjust so quickly in so many fields, and rethink all of our social/cultural connections at once. It has not been done without incurring major trauma and frustration. The medical sector has gone to such protective measures that people have died alone, void of human touch; people are fighting diseases without the side by side support of their loved ones and communities. Yet, we somehow find the strength to cheer, “we’re all in this together.”
Many of our churches have likewise had to adjust and adopt methods that have been viewed, for the most part, as luxuries, out of reach and impractical. Among the many churches, broadcasting sermons and worship is for the bigger, tele-evangelist type churches. Embracing a new way to gather together, embracing additional formats allowable in the scriptures for assembling and spiritual communion. This has not happened without various forms of turmoil, infighting, the testing of fellowship, and in some cases suspicion.
It makes me think that the church needs to be reminded to be gentle.
The Fruit of the Spirit
A study on “the fruit of the Spirit” is badly needed right now. It is the outflow of our relationship with God. These fruits provide us the resources for enduring and succeeding as God’s people during stormy weather.
What was Paul getting at in the “fruit” of the Spirit”? The word “fruit” (karpós) has a wide range of meaning: it may be translated as “fruit, grain; harvest; result, outcome; deed, action; return, gain, advantage; tribute, praise (of the lips); offspring (Lk 1:42) descendant (Ac 2:30).”[1] The word ranges from the literal to the metaphoric and context helps to limit how fruit should be understood.
Fruit is the natural outcome from a plant, a living being, or a process. Fruit bears the distinguishing characteristics of its source. A banana is the fruit of the banana tree, an apple is the fruit of an apple tree, etc. A child is the offspring (fruit) of her/his parents. An error is the outcome of misinformation or a distortion.
For example, Jesus speaks of the spiritual caliber of a person based upon the fruit of their actions and teaching:
Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits. (Matthew 7:15–20; English Standard Version)[2]
The Psalms, likewise, speak of one’s spiritual outgrowth based on a connection to the Word of God:
He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away. (Psalm 1:3–4)
These examples are samples of a greater body of biblical examples for the spiritual character of the fruit metaphor.
This metaphor directs our attention to a spiritual harvest procured from the child of God’s relationship with the Spirit. It certainly points to the important spiritual realm of our activity. Paul does not point to a spirituality detached from the world. No, God’s people must embrace that the spiritual realm bleeds over into our natural (flesh/human) world because our faith is grounded in both realms of activity.[3]
This means that Christians derive the wellspring for their actions from God’s leading, and this then frees us from any obligations to act like the customary fallen fleshly/human world. We are freed to live a life anchored to our relationship with God.
This is part of the big picture drama of Paul’s letter to the Galatians. Throughout Galatians, he displays how freedom and obligation work together in tension as Christians live freed by Christ to be obligated by the ethic of love.
For freedom Christ has set us free [theology of freedom]; stand firm therefore [ethic of obligation], and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery. (Galatians 5:1)
For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” But if you bite and devour one another, watch out that you are not consumed by one another. (Galatians 5:13–15)
These are not competing themes. I like how Charles K. Barrett (1917–2011) puts it,
There is no conflict but rather an indissoluble union between the theology of freedom and the ethics of obligation. Nor is there any equation of a compromise between the two in which each is watered down so as to accommodate the other. Freedom is real freedom, and any attempt to restrict it must be firmly refuted. But obligation is real obligation too, and there must be no attempt to evade it.[4]
Freedom and Obligation (1985)
In other words, the regenerated child of God is freed by the gospel and a life that is lived in light of God’s redemption will their obligation anchored in loving others. God’s people must certainly live with this tension: (1) a theology of freedom to live out in the natural world the love of God bred by the gospel message, and (2) the ethic of obligation that a Christian and the church is bound by to embrace the grace of God and the purpose of Christ’s death.
Making Sense of Gentleness
The most important way to understand how a word is to be understood is its context, otherwise, we may import misleading ideas into a text. Word studies are additional way to appreciate the limits of a word’s meaning. I like to look at how the ancients used the words of the New Testament, as it often provides a better sense of what Paul is saying and means.
Secular Sense. New Testament Scottish scholar, William Barclay (1907–1978), was one of the best wordsmiths of his era. His knowledge of the classics and Greek literature was astounding. In his little book, Flesh and Spirit (1962), he illustrates six ways the concept of “gentleness” (praútēs) was used in ancient secular Greek.[5]
Gentleness as a soothing quality in the face of difficulty, hardship, or bitterness.
Gentleness of conduct breeds a spirit of cooperation, especially when those with the power to act behaved differently.
In the midsts of any argument, gentleness is the attitude and culture created where “cooler heads” prevail without losing one’s temper.
The ability to take things lightly, whether going through an unpleasant experience, or, to not overreact to important things.
It is used to speak of animals which have become obedient and have learned control and discipline.
The most common use: Gentleness is seen in the portrayal of a person’s character in which strength and gentleness go together, where passion and gentleness find a balance in high degree.
The modern sense of “gentleness” carries more of the qualitative sense of “mildness of manners and disposition” (Merriam-Webster), or being “kind, calm, or soft…” (Cambridge Dictionary). There is some similarity to the ancient sense, but as Barclay points out the ancients held a more robust sense of the power and impact of “gentleness.”
New Testament Usage. I want to use Barclay’s spectrum to illustrate how the New Testament uses “gentleness” (praútēs), a term that appears eleven times (1 Cor 4:21; 2 Cor 10:1; Gal 5:23, 6:1; Eph 4:2; Col 3:12; 2 Tim 2:25; Tit 3:2; Jas 1:21, 3:13; 1 Pet 3:15). We are illustrating here how to best understand the word in the context of four New Testament case studies, and then we will look at our passage in Galatians 5:23 (and 6:1).
1 Corinthians 4:21: What do you wish? Shall I come to you with a rod, or with love in a spirit of gentleness?
In a context of correction and restoration, Paul offers this rhetorical question. The phrase “spirit of gentleness” may be translated as “a gentle spirit” (cf. Gal 6:1). In other words, this is a question about the kind of “frame of mind” the Corinthians wish Paul to arrive in.[6] The emphasis is on either whether the Corinthians want Paul to arrive with a soothing attitude (1), or with a culture of love generated by a cool temper (3). These seem to be the better options of the sense here.
2 Corinthians 10:1: I, Paul, myself entreat you, by the meekness and gentleness of Christ—I who am humble when face to face with you, but bold toward you when I am away!
When Paul addressed a slanderous charge against him that in person he was timid and in letter he is aggressive,[7] the apostle appeals to the Corinthians by “the meekness of Christ” or “Christ’s meekness.” This is clearly a reference to the balanced character of Jesus Christ who is both meek (praútēs) and gentle/forbearing (epieíkeia). In the face of conflict, Paul will appeal to the disciplined character of Jesus to be his guide (6).
Colossians 3:12: Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved compassionate hearts kindness humility, meekness, and patience...
As in Galatians 5:22–23 and Ephesians 4:2, our word appears in a list of virtues of proper conduct. In fact, much has been said about the parallels between Colossians and Ephesians, where in the latter walking in a manner worthing of the Christian calling includes walking “with all humility and gentleness, with patience bearing with one another in love” (4:2). As part of a virtue list, these contexts provide a “big picture” character portrayal to which the child of God must endeavor to pursue. It is vital to breed unity and cooperation in the body of Christ by being actively gentle (2).[8]
2 Timothy 2:25: correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth...
Paul outlines a program for Timothy on how to engage his opponents. It should not be done through bitter quarreling (2:24) but through “correction… with gentleness” (2:25). Quarreling and correcting are opposites in this context, all quarreling is inconsistent with a servant’s method of engagement, but not all correcting is quarreling. Gentleness must shape the quality of the correction. The emphasis is perhaps on the cool headed attitude (3) or a lack of overreaction to these confrontations (4).
The key takeaway from these examples is that we must make an attempt to understand how the original readers of the text would have understood praútēs, the word often translated “gentleness” or “meekness.” It is not a passive “Clark Kent” unassuming mildness, instead it is a proactive personal virtue necessary to create a culture of community.
The Fruit of Gentleness (Gal 5:23; 6:1)
When Paul lays the vice list of the “works of the flesh” side by side with the virtue list of the “fruit of the Spirit,” he is outlining what freedom in Christ looks like. The realm of the flesh enslaves whether it be the Law of Moses or it be living exclusively by our natural conventions.
The realm controlled by the Spirit, provides freedom from such constraints. We are no longer bound by the Law (for the Jews) or our vice-filled conventions (for gentiles), but are lead by the Spirit to produce a new character (the fruit/outcome).
the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
Galatians 5:22–24
The character portrayed here gives us the content of the ethic of obligation. We are free in Christ to create a new creation, an Israel of God (Gal 6:15–16). This obligation has communal implications. God’s people are must look out for each other and hold each other accountable.
Paul moves quickly from “the fruit of the Spirit” to one example of application in Galatians 6:1 which has to do with restoration:
Brothers if anyone is caught in any transgression you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted.
Galatians 6:1
I repeat what I said earlier, gentleness is part of a “big picture” character development necessary for the child of God. It must be pursued. When Christians are actively gentle its breeds unity, cooperation, and healing in the body of Christ. This fruit of the Spirit “enables the Christian to correct the erring brother without arrogance, impatience, or anger.”[9]
This fruit of the Spirit provides the gentleness and tolerance in the face of difficulties to do the better–often harder–thing.[10] Sometimes church discipline is practiced in such a punitive way that that permanent expulsion is the only outcome. We should meditate, however, on the following words,
Do not amputate [them], as a piece of gangrene flesh, from the church body, but so handle [them] as to restore [them]. Also do not do this in a proud, Pharisaical spirit.[11]
J. W. McGarvey and Philip Pendleton, Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (1916)
The process of restoration requires the connective tissue of a Spirit-led gentle community and a humble self-evaluation. J. Louis Martyn rounds out my thinking here:[12]
The restoration, then, is to be completely devoid of lasting stigma. It is to be carried out with the gentleness that is one of the marks of the Spirit-led community […] and also with circumspection. For, as the next clause indicates, all are subject to missteps. Indeed, because every member of the community […] is on the battlefront pictured in 5:17a, everyone is subject to the tempting power of the Flesh.
Galatians (2008)
Freedom and Obligation
Gentleness provides us with one virtue where the theology of freedom and the ethic of obligation are found in Christ is clearly illustrated. Here we conclude with a few examples.
When church controversies occur that leave us upset, heart broken, or disheveled, God’s people are free in Christ to break from the destructive behaviors we were once bound to. Our obligation is to be gentle in the face of conflict with those that have hurt us and that we disagree with.
When our society is embroiled in controversy and unrest, remember we have been liberated from any cultural tests of loyalty (political party, hashtag movements, etc.), because our obligation is to love our neighbor with cool-headedness and Christlike character.
When we are tempted to act out in self-righteous anger, we are freed to acknowledge our own sins that God has forgiven, and can then look in the mirror to see that our commitment to the gospel obligates us to treat others with Spirit-led community.
Love is the obligated ethic of the Christian (Lev 19:18) and it is the proving ground of true discipleship (John 13:35):
You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord. (Leviticus 19:18)
By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another. (John 13:35)
Gentleness is the method and shape of how we administer love during the various difficulties the Christian faces.
This means I must learn to do things differently. I must learn to be cool headed and kind when dealing with fallen Christians. I must learn to face the prospect of things out of my control with the balance of calmness and patience.
All of God’s people must learn to reflect the character of Jesus described by Isaiah in the following way:
a bruised reed he will not break, and a faintly burning wick he will not quench; he will faithfully bring forth justice. (Isaiah 42:3; Matthew 12:20)
Endnotes
Barclay M. Newman, Jr., A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament (Stuttgart, Germany: United Bible Societies, 1993), 92.
Unless otherwise noted all Scripture quotations are taken from the English Standard Version (ESV) of The Holy Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016).
C. K. Barrett, Freedom andObligation (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1985), 70.
William Barclay, Flesh and Spirit (Nashville: Abingdon, 1962), 112–14.
Anthony C. Thiselton, The First Epistle to the Corinthians: A Commentary on the Greek Text (Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 2000), 378.
Wayne Jackson, A New Testament Commentary (Stockton, CA: Christian Courier Publication, 2011), 359.
F. F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 152, 334.
Friedrich Hauck and Seigfried Schulz, “πραΰς, πραΰτης,” TDNT 6:650.
Herman N. Ridderbos, The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia (1953; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976), 208.
John W. McGarvey and Philip Y. Pendleton, Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians and Romans (1916; repr., Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing, 1950), 284.
J. Louis Martyn, Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008), 547.
Bibliography
Barclay, William. Flesh and Spirit: An Examination of Galatians 5:19–23. Nashville, TN: Abingdon, 1962.
Barrett, Charles K. Freedom and Obligation: A Study of the Epistle to the Galatians. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster, 1985.
Bruce, F. F. The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. NICNT. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984.
Hauck, Friedrich, and Seigfried Schulz. “πραΰς, πραΰτης.” TDNT 6:645–51.
Martyn, J. Louis. Galatians: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. AYB. Vol. 33A. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2008.
McGarvey, John W., and Philip Y. Pendleton. Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians and Romans. 1916. Repr., Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing, 1950.
Newman, Barclay M., Jr. A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament. Stuttgart, Germany: United Bible Societies, 1993.
Ridderbos, Herman N. The Epistle of Paul to he Churches of Galatia. NICNT. 1953. Repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1976.
Larry Crabb, The Safest Place on Earth: Where People Connect and Are Forever Changed (Nashville, TN: W Publishing, 1999), Hardback, 240 pages.
Dr. Larry Crabb is an established licensed psychologist, a well-known Christian author on marriage and biblical counseling topics, and current Distinguished Scholar in Residence at the Colorado Christian University (Morrison, CO).[1]
Dr. Crabb earned his Ph.D in Clinical Psychology from the University of Illinois, and has been a professor of psychology since 1970. Dr. Crabb also provides workshops and weekend seminars across the United States as part of his non-profit New Way Ministries and its web presence which features interviews, video lectures, and other multimedia outlets to share resources from his School of Spiritual Direction.
Dr. Crabb has been involved in counseling and marriage, in self-help ministry, and in developing a context of “spiritual community” for over 40 years, and so has earned a place among the various “Christian voices” seeking to make the church a better place.
In 1999, Dr. Crabb released a significant but brief volume on the church as a safe spiritual community. The volume is entitled, The Safest Place on Earth: Where People Connect and Are Forever Changed (238 pages).[2]Dr. Crabb has registered his own frustration with two elements which bear upon the community of the church and its spiritual health, which he further addresses in Real Church: Does it Exist? Can I Find It? (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 2009).
In The Safest Place on Earth, however, Dr. Crabb establishes a vision for the church as a group of believers on a journey towards God, and it is within the journey that spiritual community must begin and end for spiritual healing and direction. Despite Dr. Crabb’s own training in psychology, he believes when it comes to the soul care that ought to go on within the church, such assistance must yield “to special revelation and biblically dependent thinking.”[3]Dr. Crabb is adamant,
We don’t need more churches, as we usually define the word. We need more spiritual communities where good friends and wise people turn their chairs toward each other and talk well.[4]
Structurally, The Safest Place on Earth is organized in seventeen chapters, divided into three parts, and finishes with a section of questions for each chapter. The layout follows a very clear program of development, and the content is written in a popular style. Dr. Crabb is able to articulate and shape a conceptual paradigm of what is a spiritual community and what is not a spiritual community without complex vocabulary. His illustrations, personal anecdotes, and insights from personal interactions are delivered to support his vision for a spiritual community is very clear and helpful ways.
Dr. Crabb also interacts with and depends upon the works of Dutch Catholic priest Henri Nouwen[5](1932-1996), who focused on spiritual solitude, spiritual community, and spiritual compassion, along with Swiss Catholic philosopher Jean Vanier (b. 1928) and his work connected to L’Arche communities which have overlapping concerns.[6]
A Book Summary
In part one, Dr. Crabb develops and sharpens the idea of spiritual community and how the church needs to develop sensitivity to being the spiritual community it was intended to be. Spiritual community is, according to Crabb, at the core of what the church is.
It is people facing each other in intimate, honest, and safe ways as they journey together on their way to God. Spiritual community, however, will not occur if there is no opportunity for vulnerability and a full sense of validation from these that witness the vulnerable parts of who we are.
One of the difficulties in church community life is to wrestle with the crux,
if they knew who I really was, the church would probably not like me.
To be a spiritual community, then, we must be able to love free from ego and embrace those so broken by those things which burden our souls and even cripple us.
The health metric of a spiritual community is its ability to love the unlovable, the broken, those that can only let you love them in their brokenness.
In part two, Dr. Crabb reframes the New Testament discussion of flesh and spirit elements of our soul in terms of the analogies of the Lower Room (carnal/wretchedness) and the Upper Room (spiritual/greatness).
It is in this phase of the book that Dr. Crabb focuses on the part of the church community that needs to be addressed first — our internal struggles to be spiritual. Enter Dr. Crabb’s “two rooms” analogy which he builds from the words of Jesus:
If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. (John 14:23)
And he amplifies these words with Paul’s regarding “Christ in you” (Colossians 1:27).[7]
In essence, the two rooms represent fully furnished environments that exist within us.
Now there are two rooms inside us, the one we built where our natural self thrives, and the one the Spirit built where our natural self suffocates and our new self flourishes.[8]
Dr. Crabb does not explicitly use all the terms, but these “rooms” parallel the Freudian id, ego, and superego dynamics, the difference being they are spiritualized.[9]The lower room is self-furnished by our wretchedness and “dark forces” with its corruption and stench (id). The upper room is furnished by the Spirit of God only enjoyed once we open the doors of the lower room, acknowledge its stench, and celebrate the confidence to be a new us (an obedient us) empowered by God’s grace and teaching (superego?).
Finally, we consciously (ego?) take these “two rooms” within us and the internal struggles that go with them —because we prefer to be in the lower room— to receive outside help from “another room” which is the spiritual community, the church. This room is furnished by the Spirit with safety, vision, wisdom, and power.
In part three, Dr. Crabb continues his visioning for spiritual community with another analogy of “turning our chairs toward each other” but now by “turning our souls toward each other.”
In this process, the members of the church community must practice three needed things. First, spiritual community can only be done by the Holy Spirit. Second, personal holiness grounded in the Spirit influences the pursuit of personal holiness of others. Third, there must then be a safe place to “own and trace our desires to their source.”[10]
Spiritual community, however, will only occur when spiritual passions are “supernaturally” aroused when we are together in spiritual community experiencing acceptance, mutual faith in God’s presence in our lives, affirm the “upper room” elements in our lives, and allow God to change us without applying human pressures of forced change.
It is certainly a place of risk, but risk will always be a factor when embracing the need for vulnerability. Therefore, the real question is: will we, the church, be the safe place for those being vulnerable?
Response and Review
I chose this book principally because of the title. In fact, I had seen this title on the cover of the September/October 2001 New Wineskin magazine as part of the issue theme of “Authentic Christian Community.”[11]The concept peaked my interest because I do feel the church has not been the safest place on Earth in managing people’s sin. One example will suffice. I once heard a preacher react to the exposed sins of others with the derogatory question, “where are the normal people?” That’s not a safe place for healing. Nor is the following response to a fellow congregant’s addiction any safer, “there’s a word they need to learn – repent.”
Rebuking sin is the easy work of preaching, but creating a compassionate environment to help brothers and sisters work through repentance is the harder – and in my judgment – more fruitful work of ministry.
Crabb’s book further calls the church to be the community through which Christians experience spiritual healing for spiritual problems often mistreated —according to Dr. Crabb—as psychological disorders or problems. The gospel and the New Testament teaching that the church is the dwelling place of God, and Christians are the temple of the Holy Spirit, seem to support the overall agenda that the culture of the local congregation should be more attuned to openly working through sin, temptations, and openly celebrating grace, and spiritual empowerment by God. Even Paul declares that the church is being recreated (2 Corinthians 5:17) and repurposed for ministry (Ephesians 2:10).
Dr. Crabb’s book both intrigued me and made me uncomfortable in that he elevates the spiritual components of the church where the Holy Spirit dwells. Again, it is not that I’m troubled by the Holy Spirit, it is that in many pockets of the Churches of Christ the Holy Spirit and the use of “community” have been so tinged with so-called “liberal agendas” in the latter, and doctrinal controversial hotbeds regarding the former. His emphasis that the church is specifically designed to be a spiritual community and therefore it must be that spiritual community on a journey to God is what stands out the most to me. If we are not a spiritual community, then there will not be the Spirit.
I do not agree with all of his points on the “wretchedness” of man, but Dr. Crabb has challenged me to speak more about the Spirit and the church as the community in which God does His best work to heal us from the effects of sin.
Concluding Thoughts
What I liked overall about the book is the Dr. Crabb’s challenging call to the church to be a safe place for the sort of healing love that needs to exists between God’s people, so that the Spirit of God may work through the church to heal its members as they bear each other’s burdens with the gifts of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-26). The church must be so, because, as Dr. Crabb reminds us, we are traveling together on a journey to God.
I recommend the challenge of this book to every Christian and church leader. The reminder that Scripture centers the body of Christ as the place where the Spirit dwells, and therefore must be the safe place where the members of the body can serve each other empowered by the same Spirit. To overcome sin, the church must be, and in some cases become, the place where no one struggles with sin void of love, compassion, support, and patience as we journey to God breaking free from the bondage of sin.
Who would we be –and where– without those individuals who gave us the guidance and benefits of their wisdom accrued over the years of their experience. The powerful influences of those who have been our benefactors have left an indelible mark upon our lives in more ways than we often can be thankful for.
Of course, not all influences are of the same caliber. The Scriptures remind us of those powerful influences which may tug at our hearts and emotional fixations. Let us look at a few examples of counsel poorly chosen; then reflect upon choosing those wonderful influences which will improve our lives.
Counsel Poorly Chosen
Enabling Wrong-Doing to Satisfy an Obsession
Emotional fixations are very dangerous if left to fester and grow into obsessions. There are some who would do anything to help you gratify your desires.
No one knows this tragic lesson better than Amnon who had an obsession for his beautiful half-sister Tamar (2 Sam 13). Apparently, Amnon’s vexation was so apparent that his cousin Jonadab counsels him to pretend an illness, so that he may request the nursing care of his unsuspecting victim Tamar in his isolated chambers.
The results were a horrific incestuous rape, Amnon’s assassination at the hands of Tamar’s brother Absolam, and in turn an attack upon the throne of David as a further expression of his vengeful defiance. Absalom would lose his life in the insurrection.
Leaning on the Ambitions of the Power Hungry
In the transitional moments following King Solomon’s death and the rise of his successor Rehoboam, the young king had a choice to make: should he be a heavy-handed king like his father, or relieve the people of their plight (1 Kings 12:1-5)?
Rehoboam seeks the counsel of two groups of men, “the old men” (12:6-7) and “the young men” (12:8-11). The “old men” who had seen the oppression of his father were moved with compassion and propose that the new king’s reign should be based upon the welfare of his people, not upon an “iron fist.” [All Scripture references are from the English Standard Version unless otherwise noted.]
Unfortunately, Rehoboam listened to “the young men” with whom he had grown up. They propose an intensified cruel reign (12:9-11). The new king must be vindictive and cruel; his subjects ought to live in fear.
Little wonder that the majority of the Israelite tribes (10 of 12) seceded to follow a new claimant king – Jeroboam. The results were disastrous, for his idolatrous influence plagued the Northern Kingdom of Israel until its demise in 722 BC (2 Kings 17-18). This too was predicated upon Jeroboam’s fear of losing power over his subjects only that instead of listening to the counsel of others “he had devised [this] from his own heart” (1 Kings 12:25-33).
Accepting False Teaching Affects Moral Purity
False teachers are tremendous influences of evil upon our lives. In order to shake up the Corinthian congregation to reject false teaching regarding the resurrection (i.e. that it had already occurred, 1 Cor 15:12-32), Paul quotes the playwright Menander’s comedy Thais (ca.300 BC):
Bad company ruins good morals. (1 Cor 15:33)
By this quote, Paul argues against making associations with false teachers (false mentors); the influence would be, he argues, disastrous upon their morals (v. 34).[1]
Why?
“What could have been” enters the mind when considering the tragedy of Tamar, if only Jonadab had counseled his cousin in another direction.
One ponders, “if only Rehoboam had listened to the wise counsel of the ‘old men’” instead of submitting to the influence of his power grabbing childhood “friends”?
Too, why did Jeroboam reject the religion of the Lord after all that the Lord had promised to make a covenant with him as king (1 Kings 11:29-39)?
When the foundation of the Christian message is founded upon the resurrection from the dead according to the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:1-11), what could be so tempting in the notion that the dead do not rise (15:12)? There is nothing to gain if there is no resurrection. Why move from hope to hopelessness?
Influence and Personal Responsibility
As they say, “hind-sight is 100%.” The Monday morning quarterback is always a pro-bowler, and the “back seat” driver should be authorized to distribute driver licenses. I bring out these clichés because they are pertinent to this discussion.
The matter is not that we are “back seat” drivers telling another how they should have done better. We learn from the mistakes of the past in order to inform our own decisions so that we may not repeat their failures.
This is a matter regarding personal responsibility in light of those moments we allow others into our decision-making process.
Let the wise hear and increase in learning, and the one who understands obtain guidance, to understand a proverb and a saying, the words of the wise and their riddles. (Prov 1:5-6)
God calls us to seek His Word, warning us of the consequences of “ignoring” His counsel and reproof (Prov 1:25).
Like Amnon, Rehoboam and Jeroboam, and the Corinthians there may be temptations which vex us and those enticing us to embrace it by conspiring (via advice or false teaching) a way to experience it; however, like Joseph we need to keep our principles realizing that to satiate a sinful desire betrays God and those who would be destroyed by such an action (Gen 39:6-10).
When we are lost in the possibility that “we could” do something and never stop to think about whether we should,[2] we have left the hallmarks of responsibility behind. Proverbs 7:1-27 reminds of this truth, as Solomon speaks to the dangers of irresponsibility. Seeking counsel does not absolve us from the importance of making the right decision (Prov 11:14), nor from taking responsibility should our “counseled” decisions return to us as a mistake (Matt 5:23-24).
The Scriptures are very clear that we cannot “pass the buck” when it comes to our responsibilities. Every action – public or private – will be evaluated by a Holy God (Eccl 12:14).
The Blame Game
“Passing the buck” is such a common saying that we tend to be ignorant of its origin. President Truman has been associated with this saying, but actually, it is a term from the game of poker as played in the frontier days of the American story.
During these days, a marker or counter was a knife with a buckhorn handle – the “buck.” It “was used to indicate the person whose turn it was to deal”; moreover:
If the player did not wish to deal he could pass the responsibility by passing the ‘buck,’ as the counter came to be called, to the next player.
TrumanLibrary.org
Hence, “pass the buck” means to pass the responsibility on to someone else.
In Truman’s “farewell address” he affirms “the President – whoever he is – has to decide. He can’t pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That’s his job” (TrumanLibrary.org).
The saying applies to us all; no one can make our decisions for us. No excuses. This is “ground zero” of personal responsibility.
The First Blame Game
In the early days of the human family, Adam and Eve succumbed to the subtlety of the serpent’s questions regarding the forbidden fruit. When the Lord asked them concerning their actions, Adam and Eve attempt to distance themselves from the responsibility of their actions by placing upon either their spouse or the creature (Gen 3:8-13).
Giving in to Others is Not an Excuse
In early years of the Kingdom of Israel, King Saul was called upon to wage war upon the Amalekites. In fact, Saul was charged specifically to “go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have” (1 Sam 15:3; Lev 27:28).
Upon return from their victory over Amalek, Saul returns with the choice items of the plunders of war – with which he was not supposed to return. Moreover, he returns with the King (15:9). As a consequence, the prophet Samuel questions the king regarding the bleating of the sheep and lowing of the oxen (15:14).
The king places the burden of the decision to disobey God’s command upon the people, attempting to absolve himself from moral responsibility (15:9, 15, 20-21); yet, the king was completely complicit (15:9). Nevertheless, despite the action of others, the Lord was displeased with Saul and it cost him his throne (15:17-19, 26).
Personal Ownership
Accepting the Burden of our Decisions without Excuses
When David is presented with a parable, he unwittingly condemns himself for the adultery with Bathsheba (2 Sam 11:1-5), a failed cover-up (11:6-13), and the murder of Uriah (11:14-27).
Instead of passing the buck, David accepts accountability and the consequences of his sin. Unlike the many cases of Saul’s incessant impudence, denying his sins – David quickly moves to being convicted of heart. One only needs to read Psalm 51 in order to see his contrition for his sins before God.
Our Future is Based upon Decisions Made Today
When the Kingdom of Judah was exiled into captivity in the 7th–6th century BC, one of the concerns raised is the following: “Our fathers sinned, and are no more; and we bear their iniquities” (Lam 5:7). The exile was a time where the question of sin and responsibility and accountability before the Lord was pondered.
In Ezekiel 14:12-23, the prophet makes it clear that even if many Old Testament faithful were alive during the days of the exile, men like Noah, Daniel and Job would be saved and delivered from the exile because they are righteous. Unlike the rebellious character of the generation of the exile, righteous people could experience deliverance.
This is heavily answered in chapter 18; in particular verses 19–20:
Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. (Ezek 18:19)
The son can escape the consequences of his father’s sin by living faithfully to the Lord. We must realize that our futures are partly shaped by our decisions.
One of the most important aspects to receiving the guidance offered by another is taking ownership of the decision to act on it or not.
Some attempt to fabricate a scenario in order to get the advice they desired in the first place but what they wanted was the “green light” from “another” to relieve them of responsibility. Some else made their choice for them.
Others simply run with the first piece of advice thrown at them. In either case, whether it is poor advice or good advice, one cannot escape personal responsibility for the course taken. Here we conclude our discussion.
Good Counsel Taken
Naomi and Ruth
One of the tenderest moments in Old Testament history is the relationship between Naomi and Ruth. After being widowed in the land of Moab, she gave her sons into marriage only to lose them over the course of a decade (Ruth 1:1-5). The only daughter-in-law to remain with Naomi is Ruth, and she joins Naomi on her return to Israelite land (1:6-22).
Being a stranger in another culture is difficult, but thankfully for Ruth she was blessed by a kind man (Boaz) who knew her story. Boaz cautioned her to stay on his land and among his servants and the young women.
When she returns to Naomi’s abode, Naomi reinforces Boaz’s counsel so that she is not assaulted by men in another field (2.22).
Naomi then counsels her to remarry with Boaz – a “redeemer” (2:20; 3:1-17). A redeemer is “one who frees or delivers another from difficulty, danger, or bondage.”[3] And Naomi provides the love, direction, and mentorship to give Ruth a chance at a good life with Boaz after enduring all the hardship of being a widow.
While Boaz works out the details with the extended family of Naomi’s husband, Ruth returns home and explains the situation to her. In a moment of wisdom, Naomi tells Ruth:
Wait, my daughter, until you learn how the matter turns out, for the man will not rest but will settle the matter today. (Ruth 3:18)
The outcome was a marriage that would be central to the lineage of King David (Ruth 4:13-22), and ultimately the ancestral beginnings of Jesus (Matt 1:5-6, 16).
Mordecai and Esther
When Esther replaces Vashti as queen of Persia, in the days of King Ahasuerus her relationship with her cousin Mordecai results in the protection of the Jewish population in exile.
A plot had emerged to genocide the Jewish population of the Persian Empire orchestrated by Haman. When Mordecai becomes aware of the plot, he impresses upon Esther with counsel to go to the king to stop it:
And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this? (Esth 4:14b)
The results where an intercession so dramatic that Haman’s plot is foiled, he is punished by death, the Jews are delivered, and the Feast of Purim is inaugurated to honor this great event (Esth 5:1-9:32).
Samuel and Eli
In those transitional years when Israel settled into the land of Canaan, the Lord raised “judges” to deliver the people from oppression and led them to faithfulness. The last of the judges is the prophet Samuel. His beginnings are miraculous (1 Sam 1-2).
When he was a very young boy, Samuel’s mother Hannah lends him over to the Lord’s service for the entirety of his life (2:21-28). Samuel is placed into the care of the high priest Eli.
When Samuel grows to be “young man” he is found serving under Eli. On one occasion, when Samuel was sleeping “the Lord called Samuel” (3:4); it was during a unique time when “the word of the Lord was rare” and there “was no frequent vision” (3:1b). Consequently, Samuel – and Eli – did not understand what was happening when the Lord began to call Samuel for service.
Samuel initially arose from bed and presented himself before Eli, “Here I am”. Three times it occurred, twice Eli responded, “I did not call; lie down” (3:4-7). On the third time, Eli “perceived” that Samuel was being called by the Lord (3:8).
Eli counsels Samuel on how to respond to the Lord’s call (3:9): “Speak, Lord, for your servant hears.” That one moment of guidance set the groundwork for one of the greatest prophets of biblical history. Samuel led Israel faithfully, he set up kings (Saul and David) and deposed another (Saul).
Concluding Thoughts
Where would we be without mothers who guided our futures by their powerful faith? How would we make those important life-changing decisions without the passionate pleas from our friends? Or, how would we see the Lord calling us to do great things for Him if not by trusting in the wisdom of a good friend?
“No man is an island”; neither are our decisions. “What would ‘_’ have done” has helped us on many occasions. Let us apply wisdom prayerfully, knowing that in the end, the responsibility of our actions is all on us. Let there be mercy.
Endnotes
Marion L. Soards, 1 Corinthians (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1999), 339.
This is a play on a scene from the sci-fi film Jurassic Park (Universal, 1993) where Dr. Ian Malcolm reacts to the reckless behavior of geneticists in the film who were cloning dinosaurs for an amusement park. Here is the dialogue courtesy of IMDB.com: Dr. Ian Malcom: If I may… Um, I’ll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you’re using here, it didn’t require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn’t earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don’t take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now [bangs on the table] Dr. Ian Malcolm: you’re selling it, you wanna sell it. Well… John Hammond: I don’t think you’re giving us our due credit. Our scientists have done things which nobody’s ever done before… Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, yeah, but your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn’t stop to think if they should.
“Redeemer,” Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, ed. Ronald F. Youngblood (Nashville, TN: Nelson, 1995), 1073.
biblicalfaith.online 