This is where text would be if I had written anything for chapter 2.
Categories
Tag: chapter 2
Categories
Genesis | Chapter 2
One of the questions we have to answer in chapter 2 is, where are we at in the timeline? Man was already created in chapter 1, and God was resting from being done with everything already. And yet, we find the creation of humans back in focus. I’ve seen atheist arguments against Genesis for being bad history because it can’t get its creation story right. But this accusation is based upon a shallow reading of the text and an expectation of how the story is being told that isn’t grounded in reality. This recorded story has been around for anywhere between 7,000 to 10,000 years and the world’s 3 major religions are based upon it. Certainly it takes some level of arrogance to believe that none of them caught on to the fact that the creation of man shows up again in chapter 2. Yes, we’re all aware of it. But this isn’t a linear history, it’s storytelling (true stories, yes) but we are to learn true things by how the story is told.
So, what’s going on here? We’re zooming in. Chapters 1 and 2 are complimentary accounts. We see God initially as a sovereign Creator who sits above His creation. Now, the picture deepens, it becomes richer, and we see an intimate and relational God, planting gardens and personally “breathing” life into the unique creature that bear His image. With it, we get a change of name. The Hebrew word translated as God up to this point has been ‘elohiym. When we zoom in, though, we get His name, “Yahweh”, translated in most texts as LORD. Thus, in 2 v.4 we get LORD God (Yahweh elohiym).
Also, it’s not clear in the English translation but in Hebrew there is a clear connection between man and the ground in the wording used (adama – ground, adam – man). In v. 15, it’s clear that man is especially suited to tend to the ground, work is a good thing and it is fruitful and rewarding for man to do it. And yet, they are dependent upon each other. If something happens to the land, it puts man’s existence at risk. Keep these things in perspective for chapter 3.
Greg touched on this, but to expand upon the trees just a bit. I think what we’re seeing is a tree of life that they are free to eat from as it provides the fruit that they may live forever (as long as they can keep eating it). Then you have the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. I think this is a merism again, meaning it’s the tree of knowledge of everything (this makes sense with how the snake ultimately talks about it). If they eat from this they will surely die because part of the knowledge they get will be bad (meaning morally corrupt) and they will die (eventually) because they will be cut off from the tree of life, no longer able to live forever. I believe that’s where the warning comes together with the reality of dying.
Finally, on the creation of woman, a few things to note. Adam is put into a deep sleep as God takes his rib to form the woman. Note that the man has done nothing here, he has no claim of creation of the woman, they both stand equal before God (as noted in chapter 1). We see the woman described as a “helper”. This word is similarly used to describe God’s relationship to humanity, so if your first reaction is to think of “helper” as somehow subservient, you’ll need to take your rendering of that relationship up with God and see who comes out on top. (I’ll note that the feminist perspective that woman is the last thing created so is the most refined and obviously superior creation over all that have come before is also an incorrect rendering.)
In general, we can rightly see that man is intended to be with the woman, in fact he is “completed” and they are restored to one flesh when they are together. Certainly, the specific nature of this description makes it clear the expectation of human relationships, comparing to polygamy in the ancient world and any number of alternative relationship options that exist in our day
Categories
Lamentations | Chapter 2
The lament continues. It’s a new poem and the acrostic starts over again. Similar to the last one we have different perspectives throughout the poem. It starts with the narrator in v.1-10. In v.11, the perspective shifts to a personal one, “My eyes are spent with weeping…”, it seems like a prophet of sorts who weeps for the nation and its disobedience but who doesn’t consider himself part of the nation that disobeyed. He speaks to Jerusalem. Jerusalem responds, not to the prophets words, but back to God, just like the end of the last one, asking God to look upon them and have pity on how harshly He has dealt with them.
I’m not going to necessarily go line by line here, much of it is easy enough to understand. Again, though, it’s best to read through it by saying it out loud.
Lots about how angry God is in this chapter. When it says, “He has cast down heaven to earth the splendor of Israel” we are reminded that this nation was one that was once lifted up, brought high by the Most High God, and now they are brought low, cast from being held up by God and left to their own destruction. The phrase, “…day of his anger” is repeated here from chapter 1 and will continue to show up.
Notice in v.2 we’re told that the strongholds of Judah are broken down, which they were indeed warned about by the prophet Amos. God’s “right hand” has been withdrawn, the power hand that shows up in such circumstances as attacking Pharaoh’s armies and protecting his people, is no longer there to protect them. As a result, their enemies come and the narrator attributes the deaths that occurred during the siege of Jerusalem to God himself, saying “…he has killed all who were delightful in our eyes in the tent of the daughter of Zion…” This is likely in reference to the the many military men who fled with the king when the Babylonians came into town. They were eventually caught and either killed or captured (and the king himself had his eyes gouged out after they killed his kids in front of him and then he was led away). Jeremiah 52 has the deets if you want to read up on it.
Here’s the thing with all of this – I don’t like it. This killing and anger and abandoning of people, I don’t like it. But then I think of two things.
1.) These are indeed a rebellious people. As we read some of the prophets that came before this…why aren’t the people listening? God warned them and warned them and warned them. He called them to repentance over and over again. All that they mourn over losing were things God graciously gave them to begin with. They are not entitled to his mercy here, what they had they never earned anyway. And they took that status of being God’s people and they spit in his face. If the reactions recorded in Lamentations are to be believed, it seems like God’s methods work do they not? I worry that my initial reaction to this means that I don’t think sin is as bad as it really is.
2.) Justice isn’t mine, it’s God’s. Perhaps I can’t look at the world like that because I’m not humanly capable of it. We can handle the mercy stuff because it’s given out freely to anyone willing to turn and follow it into the Kingdom. But the justice, I don’t get to deal it out because I wouldn’t get it right. Too harsh, too soft, too gullible, whatever the issue is I know that I have it. So I can only communicate that God is ultimately just and will handle things appropriately.
In v.6, we’re reminded that not only are the people being punished but the very place where God lived among the people, the Temple (his booth, his meeting place), has also been destroyed. Not only that, but v.9 will say that the prophets of the people are no longer receiving visions of the Lord. He has gone silent. He has abandoned them.
Recognize the image from v.8? That’s right, Amos again. That plumb line used to show how out of joint the walls were shows back up and did the very thing he said he would. Continuing into v.9, that which protects them has been ruined, the law (part of their identity as God’s people) is no more, and the visions are gone. And the elders know it – they mourn for their circumstances they are now in.
v.10 switches to this prophet character. Either this is indeed just a character being used to express a prophet’s perspective or is a real dude who speaks but who is not among the prophets with no vision. In either case, he’s devastated both emotionally and physically. Especially worth noting is his reaction to the least able in society, the infants and the babies, who are being impacted by the sins of the parents. There was indeed a great famine in the city at the time. Children are not only dying here but, jump to v.20, it seems like mothers may be eating their children to stay alive (again, the depth of their depravity).
15-16 speaks of the perspective of her enemies – how they scoff and celebrate and her downfall. Directly following, a reminder that God said this would happen. v.20 Jerusalem now speaks and demands that the Lord see what the destruction He has brought is doing to them. They protest at the impact on the children and how those who (are supposed to) do the work of God are being killed within the place where the Lord dwells. How could He let this happen? The young and the old are dead, the youth have died, and they lay it at God’s feet – He has killed them in the day of his anger (phrase is back in both 21 and 22).
Remember the type of writing this is, it’s a lament, not a straightforward argument (although it contains elements of one). It kind of makes you wish for a Job type response, kind of an “are you done?” moment where God reminds them of who they are, who He is, and how many times he warned them and called them to repentance. But that’s not what’s happening here, we get predominantly the weeping and wailing in the streets.
Categories
Malachi | Chapter 2
In chapter 2, the discussion with the priests continues and moves into both the consequences of all of this as well as the underlying issue – the breaking of a covenant and the lack of faithfulness.
God has always made covenants with his people, they do this, he’ll do that. He will be their God, they will be His people. The Levites were the priests, the faithful ones from Deuteronomy 33:8-10 whose job it was to teach the people, make sure they know what is right and to administer the sacrifices. Even when Israel wandered, the priests were there to remind them, bring them back. And what are we finding? Even they are bailing. When the people needed them the most, they stopped caring, became derelict in their duties. Basically, if these priests will not honor God and do the work they are supposed to do, God will not bless their work. In fact, God will curse those the blessings they declare.
God’s ultimate reaction to them breaking the covenant, not keeping up their end of the deal, is to reject their sacrifices and rebuke the Levite lineage (offspring) and then…well…spread dung on their faces and send them and their dung faces out of the temple. Now, in this case, dung refers to the innards of the sacrifices that were taken outside the temple and burned. That part is rejected, and so now are the priests who wear these rejected sacrifices on their face. I mean, dang, that’s fierce.
God continues to remind them of what this covenant was that they have disregarded. It was a promise of life and peace (and God was faithful). The Levites rightly feared God, stood in awe of His name, spoke truth, walked in peace and uprightness and turned away from the wrong thing. The priests pursued knowledge and shared it with the people that they should desire the same knowledge; they spoke for God. (What a harrowing yet cool responsibility they had!) Yet, they led people astray, corrupted them, and so God gives them the just consequences of being brought low in front of those they failed to serve.
Here’s the thing, there are consequences to not keeping covenants. If there weren’t, no one would bother making them. God always told his people that he would be faithful to them and bless them but they must keep up their end of the covenant. And time and time again they did not do it and they received the consequences. What’s cool, though, is those consequences were always intended to call them back to the covenant, to have them join back with God that they may be blessed.
I think we need to be careful with v.10 onward. Although I think there are tangible, people-level things to take away from this section about marriage, I think the broad point is to use faithless marriage as a comparison to Israel’s relationship with God. What those who bring offerings to the temple have done to their wives and what the priests have done to their wives is like what Israel has done to God. Coming off of what Malachi has described so far, a few verse diversion solely to hit up the sanctity of marriage, only to dive back out of that and back into shallow, lazy worship and covenant keeping for the rest of the book doesn’t really make any sense. Again, I think the people level lessons we can learn here are still right and good, but I think it serves two purposes.
We see this theme of “faithlessness” start to show up over and over again in this section. Malachi asks why the people of God have been faithless to one another, profaning the temple with their junk sacrifices and marrying those who do not serve God. (We’ve seen similar downfalls with Solomon, yes?) By why is this described as them being faithless to one another? Because failure to keep their covenant with God has consequences that fall on everyone. It’s communal. (Interesting, saw very similar concepts in the letters of John. We love others by keeping God’s commandments.) Again, the blindness of Israel shows up here – they do this marrying outside of God’s people and still come to the altar and offer to God as if it’s not a thing. Everyone knows it’s a thing.
Then back to the priests, who seem to weeping like children do when they have been rightly accused of doing the wrong thing but they are trying to pass it off as if they are not guilty by crying to bring the point home. Pathetic. These jokers, in addition to betraying every duty they are responsible for, are discarding their wives and chasing other ladies around. That marriage is a covenant, they are joined together as one (a union that the Spirit is part of) and yet they have been faithless. They are dishonoring their covenant and not producing Godly offspring (physically, children, but on the broader sense of Israel’s unfaithfulness to God, the product or offspring is probably a growing, blessed nation that serves as a light to the world.)
God is not fooled, he hates what they’re doing, and their selfishness and unfaithfulness will have consequences. No one is quite sure what “…covers his garment with violence” means but everyone agrees that it can’t possibly be good. The way to prevent this, Malachi says, is easy – do not be faithless.
Categories
1 John | Chapter 2
Mercy, for a fanciful character, John cuts it to the cloth in this chapter.
He open up with “My little children…”, that sounds nice. John says we shouldn’t sin, but that if we do (and we know we will because he said in chapter 1 that anyone who says they have no sin is lying) that we have Jesus who advocates on our behalf, who has appeased the justice of the Father. This is good news (and it’s not just us, it’s available for the sins of the whole world.)
And then the hammer drops. We know that we have come to know Jesus if we keep his commandments. “Believe” must bring obedience and action, otherwise our belief is shallow (sounds like our man James, yes? Faith without works is dead.) If we say we know Jesus and we don’t keep his commandments John says we are lying (he’s quick to call out liars in this section). “Whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked”. John was the last living direct apostle, he likely knew everything written before him. Apparently at the end of the 1st century they’re having issues with people saying they believe in and follow Jesus who aren’t actually following him with their lives. John is having none of it.
Remember, though, that this doesn’t mean we can live a sinless life, John already made that clear. What he’s saying is, this ain’t no show. If you say you’re going to follow Jesus, you have to be doing what he did, doing what he tells you. If not, you might be hanging around the bros and wearing the clothes and reading the books but you’re not actually submitting to Jesus, which means your life as a Christian is a lie.
Then John breaks into talking about the “new” commandment being the same as the “old” commandment. This almost has to be love God with all your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself. Jesus says that sums up the law and the prophets and that continues to guide what we do today. That’s why John says here that if you hate your brother you are still in darkness, where those who love your brothers abide in the light (again, light and dark have connotations of the characteristics of God and us faithfully living those out.)
There’s kind of a neat little poem in the middle, pretty easy to get, though.
Then he moves into some stuff that sounds a lot like Galatians and James. He says, “Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the father is not in him.” We have to pick who to serve, we can’t chase what the world honors because we know that Jesus didn’t chase that (in fact his life was a collection of shaming in the world’s perspective.) Ultimately, the world will pass away, but if we abide in God, He is faithful and we will be protected forever.
And then the antichrist(s) show up. That’s not capitalized because it’s not a specific person, the word basically means “those who oppose the Messiah”. Note John says there are many of them, they are around in John’s day and they are characterized as those who deny Jesus as the Messiah, or Jesus as the son and God as the father. And they apparently try to deceive others into denying those things as well (I’m looking at you, Jehovah’s Witnesses.) Even so, John says we don’t have to worry, stick with Jesus and the things we know about Him and we will be protected by the Son and the Father eternally. Stick with Jesus and it’ll be fine.
Categories
Hebrews | Chapter 2
The long discussion in chapter 1 starts to come to relief in chapter 2. The reason we need to know that Jesus is greater than the angels is because they need to be reminded to focus that much more on the message that Jesus brings as they once focused on the message the angels had brought in the past. (Dig on Acts 7:5 where the Law is said to have been brought by angels. This is a Jesus is greater than the Law discussion. Perhaps the author is Paul after all, eh?) The Law given to Moses from God (through the angels) was reliable and there were just consequences built into it, they risk missing the great salvation that Jesus brings by focusing on that which has already been fulfilled.
Further, they know that the good news that Jesus brings is true because God himself bore witness to it by signs and wonders and miracles and the provision of the Holy Spirit. (This affirms the purpose of the miracles as understood through the Gospels, it’s how we know that what Jesus claims about himself is true. With that foundation in place, his message must be true and the call to obey it and follow him extends from that.)
The exaltation of Jesus continues. The “world to come” (think the end of the age, in which they/we are in the “last days”, ch. 1 v.2) is not under the rulership of angels but of Jesus. Hebrews author vaguebooks us here and acts like he has no idea where his quotation of “What is man…” is from. Sly boots. Its Psalm 8:4-6, which speaks of the majesty of God and the graciousness of his putting creation at the service of mankind. However, this quote serves two purposes here in relation to Jesus. One, it identifies him as a sharing the position of man when he came to serve and die on the cross, a time when he was indeed lower than the angels (affirming the counterargument the Hebrews may be having in context of chapter 1.) Yet, it also points to Jesus’ ultimate place as the “son of man” (the way Jesus refers to himself, calling us back to the Daniel 7 Messiah figure) who has everything in subjection under his feet. Except in this case, the “everything” is more than just earthly creation. In fact, our writer says that at the moment, we don’t even know everything that Jesus rules over. (Could be monsters, aliens and potentially some yet to be discovered mosquito species. Be open to other possibilities.)
Ultimately, it is fitting that that Jesus is crowned with glory and honor (in a way that mankind never really achieved) because he died on the cross so that we didn’t have to. To the writer, it makes sense that God would bring his “sons” (back to humans) to glory through Jesus, who is made “perfect” through suffering. We should think “made” in the sense of fulfillment, not changing of. Jesus lived his life perfectly on earth which is what allows him to be an appropriate sacrifice in our place.
And Jesus, this perfect, sacrificing Jesus, is not ashamed to call us his brothers (the word also means “siblings”). The rest of the chapter touches on this in one way or another. I know, certainly, that Jesus died on the cross to save me. But in practical terms, I have a hard time understanding that he is not ashamed to call me brother. He bailed me out, he continues to bail me out, and it is my actions, thoughts, and motivations that continue to causes the situation that I need bailed out of. But not only is Jesus willing to take the impact of my shameful action and pay the penalty for it, he is unashamed to proclaim to the world, to put his arm around me and say, “World, I’m Jesus. This is Ben, he’s my brother, I am happy to introduce you to him.” He who knows all, created all, gave all…not ashamed. I may live the rest of my life and not get that completely, but perhaps it will be the grace of God that I may live a life that reflects that reality.
The connection between Jesus and us are many. We are both “children” of God (in different senses, of course) but we did share flesh and blood (Jesus just for a time), and we were both subjected to the temptations of the enemy. However, the physical death of our imperfect lives could not destroy the enemy, and knowing this humanity lived in fear of death (and lifelong slavery). But Jesus, his death conquered that which brought us fear and death, the weapon of the enemy has been taken from his hands (he is bound!) and the fear of death and the slavery it brings with it no longer apply to the people of the Kingdom. That is to the benefit of children of Abraham, not to the angels, but to us, even though we were made lower than them.
The humanity of Jesus makes him the perfect high priest. The one who would enter the temple and make the sacrifices on behalf of the people and petition God’s mercy on their behalf to satisfy the penalties for the sins they had committed. Jesus is that, forever holding that role and administering the work behind it perfectly. We are safe with High Priest Jesus, whose job even has him continuing to minster to us (in his teaching, his life example, the provision of the Holy Spirit) that he might come to our aid when we are tempted. As he was human for a time, he is aware of our temptations and is able to help us as we fight against them.
Paul continues his discussion of the circumstances in which he initially engaged with the Thessalonican church. They came from Philippi where they indeed were treated rough (brought in front of the town leaders, jailed, etc.) but they also had great success with the conversion of the jailer, the casting of the demon out of the little girl, and hanging out with the ladies of Philippi (all documented in Acts 16.) Even so, despite the risk of landing in more trouble when they arrived, Paul and the bros still spread the true good news to the Thess. church. Paul and the bros work for God, their job is to spread good news even knowing men can and will react poorly to it at times. In that perspective, it certainly wasn’t to their benefit, they were doing so, in fact at a personal risk, yet they continued. And even though they carried with them important work and could have asked for special treatment, they did not, but instead were freely giving of their time and wisdom and service.
Paul also reasserts the context of their behavior among the Thess. church, being blameless, righteous, holy, etc. and how they encouraged them to “…walk in a manner worthy of God”. Again, actions set the context for the words. Tighten up on your job, homey.
And Paul is excited that the Thess. church received all of this so well and saw it for what it was, not just a competing claim among men, but good news from the true God. That said, not everyone reacted that same way, as just in Judea, the Jews did not take kindly to this Christian movement and caused trouble for those bringing that good news in. Details in Acts 17, but basically Paul and the bros hung out in Thess. for 3 weeks, Gentiles, Greeks and ladies were brought to Jesus, Jews got upset and accused them of proclaiming a king other than Caesar. Ultimately, they paid off the town leaders and were let go.
Paul doesn’t mince words here, the Jews killed Jesus and the prophets, chucked Jesus’ followers, displeased God and have attempted to hinder that which is to the benefit of all mankind – that’s quite a laundry list of poor behavior. In response, Paul says God’s wrath has come upon them at last. Given when this was written, this could be referring to a relatively recent famine in Jerusalem or other poor treatment of them by the Romans. However, it’s also written in such a way where this could be something that is yet to happen but is so certain it can be spoken of in the present tense.
Then the discussion shifts as Paul tries to describe why he has not yet returned to them even though he wanted to. Paul does reveal himself as the author of the letter in this section. Even though they wanted to come back it seems that Satan hindered them (not exactly sure what the deal was or why this was attributed to Satan as opposed to sinful humans, manhandling Jews, sickness, or whatever else he has expressed issues with in other letters.)
Don’t miss the last sentence here, which points out that what they expect to show Jesus at his return, the thing that will show that they have been faithful is the faith of others through their work. Whatever our aims in life as Christians, if it doesn’t include this understanding of what Jesus values, it will fall short of fulfilling God’s purpose in our lives.
Well alright, probably more ink has spent on this chapter than almost any other chapter in the NT (and it’s not like Paul is foreign to difficulty). I will not claim to have brilliant insight here when there have been many smart people who love Jesus who can’t agree on it. However, I do think we can try to put some borders around it, contain the discussion within viable bounds and then let the uncertainties that remain do so within those confines.
The beginning of this chapter seems to be the primary reason for this second letter to the Thessalonians. Even though Paul discussed this at the end of the 1st letter, they simply can’t seem to let it go and are concerned that the Day of the Lord has come without them knowing it. Now, we know from folks like Amos and Malachi that the Day of the Lord was traditionally used to describe a time when God would show up and intervene, generally in the context of redeeming his people or punishing their enemies.
Some folks try to say that Paul is using the Day of the Lord in this way, separate from the return of Jesus. However, that flies in the face of context since v.1 talks about “concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ…” It really couples these two things together in this case, so I think that is the basis of the start of the conversation (but not necessarily the end). In either case, they need to chill out. If the 1st letter to these cats taught us anything, it’s that you won’t freakin’ miss the coming of Jesus (trumpets, and angels and all this). Someone is trying to influence them to believe ridiculous things and Paul is reminding them to not be deceived by spirits or words or writings that aren’t from the bros or doesn’t agree with what they’ve taught them.
Now, we need to read what comes next in context of what Jesus said in the Olivet discourse (Matthew 24). From that, we know that there will be signs of the destruction of the Temple and after that no additional signs before Christ’s return. Certainly Paul was familiar with this. So, he says Jesus will not return unless the rebellion comes first and some dude of lawlessness is revealed who thinks he’s hot stuff and an object of worship and takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. Further, Paul seems to think the Thessalonians should remember what he already told them and that they remember what is restraining this guy so that he may be revealed in his time (and the process has already started). And the restrainer will only do so until he doesn’t, basically (not helpful, right?).
The work of the man of lawlessness is by the influence of Satan, allowing him to do false signs and wonders that deceive for those who are already dying because they refuse to believe the gospel. And God allows them (even is part of allowing that to persist) so that they believe false things in order that they will be condemned because they refused to believe the truth and had pleasure in unrighteousness. (If there’s a tie to the 1st chapter, this group is also part of the persecution of the church, the trouble the Thess. church is suffering under).
Ok, so things to consider. Although easy to move all of this to some time in the long future, I don’t think the language or context will allow that. First, the lawless one takes his seat in the temple of God, which will be gone in 30 years. To get around this folks say that the temple is either not really a temple (but instead God’s people) or that it is a rebuilt temple (in fact, this section underlies much of why people think a temple needs rebuilt, coupled with some stuff in Revelation). Although I might be willing to consider “temple as God’s people” in apocalyptic literature (in Revelation, for example), the action of “taking a seat” and the existence of a literal, physical temple at the time without additional clarification here doesn’t really seem to make sense. Sounds like a literal temple which means it needs to sit in their current context.
Further, Paul says they know who the restrainer is. I mean, again, I suppose that could be something that they know that could be true for hundreds or thousands of years later, but it seems to be a person and they understand (or should have remembered) that it will only be for a time. And the mystery of lawlessness is already at work. I have to bring a lot to the text to assume that it is something that isn’t relevant to them at their time. As a matter of fact, unless they have completely forgotten all of whatever Paul said to them on this subject in the past, it seems reasonable to think that their concern that the Day of the Lord has already occurred must be supported by the thought that this man of lawlessness business has already taken place, which means from what they know they must be believe that it was possible for it to take place already (vs. something that is obviously happening far from then.)
Also notice that when the description of Jesus shows up to kill this lawless one with the breath of his mouth, we don’t hear anything more about his second coming. In fact, nothing more addresses Jesus returning for his people after the 1st verse. Seems a bit odd if this whole killing of the lawless man action is happening at the same time to not reinforce at some point here or later in the letter the very thing they seem concerned about. But it doesn’t happen.
Why not? Because this isn’t the sure sign of when Jesus will return, it’s a sure sign of the one thing that Jesus said has sure signs…the destruction of the Temple. For me, I think the right barriers are that 1.) all of this is happening in their lifetime 2.) it’s not connected to Jesus’ second coming and the end of the age 3.) the man of lawlessness, the restrainer, and the rebellion are all people/things that happen as part of the destruction of the temple.
Are their options that fit this? Nothing that’s a slam dunk. There’s a Jewish dude, John of Gischala, who led the zealots who eventually overtook the Temple, killed off a ton of the Jews who wouldn’t join the fight against Rome, starved the people of Jerusalem and did a bunch of other junk that I think makes sense. Some folks think the man of lawlessness is one of the Roman emperors. I’m open to options here, but I think ouir walls are the right ones.
Some people try to tie this man to a future Antichrist or a church tribulation, but as we saw in John’s letters he thought there were multiple anti-Christ’s and they were active and about during his time. John, in Revelation, also said the tribulation was happening at his time as well. So, any consistency there is generally not an affirmation of some sort of future big event just as Jesus returns.
The last section of the chapter is an encouragement of their security in Jesus and to stand firm and hold to the true teachings of the gospel they heard. Further, they ask God to comfort them in this time of persecution and give them the energy and will to pursue every good work and word.
Categories
1 Timothy | Chapter 2
In chapter 2, Paul moves into some practical life stuff, answering the ever-present New Testament question: how then shall we live? His urge to Timothy is to constantly be petitioning God on behalf of everyone (yikes, that’s a lot of people), which is to include kings and all those in high positions. Our prayers are agnostic to the political climate around us, power always needs prayer.
But look at the outcome. We do this “…so that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way.” There’s multiple ways to take this, but I think we can safely assume that praying for everyone will take up plenty of time to keep you out of trouble. It will also always frame those with power around you as someone who you are rooting for (at least spiritually) and keep you from becoming some kind of political hack on one side or the other. Prayer helps maintain right perspective on the world in its fallen state and the fallen people who walk, work and weep within it.
And Paul says this makes God happy, as he desires all to be saved (the praying is the connection here). The footnotes in the ESV make a shallow argument at best for a Reformed view on this passage. The claim is that “…God’s greater desire is to display the full range of his glory which results in election depending upon the freedom of his mercy and not upon human choice.” I fail to see how His glory is not displayed through human choice, and the commentary leaves this undiscussed, it just assumes there is greater glory in humans not having a choice.
Speaking of things unclear, I’m not sure why Paul deems it necessary to assure Timothy he is not lying about being appointed a preacher and an apostle, ultimately a teacher of the Gentiles. I would assume by now that Timothy certainly knows the truth of this. In either case, Gentiles do indeed seem to be Paul’s part in the “all people” who God desires to be saved. The basic description of the good news “…there is one God, and there is one mediator…” seems to represent the type of thing he might say to the Gentiles that stands conversely against other ways Gentile folk may think eternal life or deities may work.
The conversation continues with Paul’s vision of how these groups of “all people” look like in worship to God. Dudes are together, lifting holy hands together and not fighting. Ladies are drawing attention to themselves because of their good works, not their hair or out-of-control-ness. This seems to have been a problem as Paul continues on that ladies are supposed to be quiet while learning and to not teach or exercise authority over any of these dudes lifting holy hands together. This, as you can imagine in today’s culture, is a freakin’ hornets nest.
Things to consider for context. It’s interesting that we don’t generally take “lifting holy hands” as a firm command for the dudes but treat the adornment and silence of the ladies as if it is a firm command. Further, if we don’t over-isolate this particular conversation, it seems to sit within the context of Paul talking about the kinds of things that might happen when these “all people” get together to praise God. The dudes don’t argue and lift hands and the ladies stop dressing like street-walkers and stop interrupting and making a scene. In these perspectives, the context can appear limited to just Paul’s situation (or at least the situation of that era of folk.)
However, his justification for not having ladies teach is significantly more far-reaching. Paul points back to the creation order to establish this who teaches who stuff, and further to Eve’s propensity to deception. I get the first one, the second I have a hard time with (Adam also sinned, failed to protect his wife as well as the situation he was in, and all ladies kind of get sacked for this behavior. Although, if there is a sinful nature, Adam gets tagged with that for all humanity, so there you go.) Either way, the reasoning for not allowing ladies teach certainly reaches beyond that time period and harkens back to a truth that has been around since creation. Further, in chapter 3, the qualifications for elder/pastor are male oriented, which would support something beyond Paul’s context as well.
What do we do with this then? I’m hard-pressed for a firm answer. Although I think the context may allow these distinctions to be non-binding outside of Paul’s world, the justification he gives for the restriction does not. Further, the posturing in the discussion in modern circles presupposes that the declaration, at face value, is not a good one and must be explained away some how. I worry that we miss something that is good, albeit counter to modern culture, while trying to wrestle it into something we are more comfortable with.
That said, Paul often lifts up women who work around him, including Priscilla, whom is listed before her husband Aquila by both Paul and Luke (in Acts) and who is credited with helping to teach Apollos. Here is a point where we should acknowledge that there are faithful people who love Jesus who are working prayerfully through the implications of this passage as it relates to both the modern context and that of its time. Missing a clear conviction on either side, I can only propose grace until then.
This chapter ends with further complication. Paul seems to insinuate that ladies can be saved through childbearing, if they continue in faith and love and holiness and self-control. I don’t know man, that last part calls back to the start of the chapter which ties all of what he wrote together as simple, faithful instructions on what we ought to be about as followers of Jesus. That childbearing business throws it for a loop. The best I can discern is that we’re to see childbearing as an example of faithful work that mimics maturity physically the same way remaining faithful and praying for others and such does spiritually. I’m about 20% confident in that explanation, though.
Categories
2 Timothy | Chapter 2
Paul continues the same discussion in chapter 2, just in slightly different ways. We’re still talking about the grace of Jesus and still talking about carrying forth that which Paul started. In an echo from his first letter to Timothy, Paul encourages him to, “…entrust [what you have heard from me] to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.” Basically, make disciples. Also, remember the word “disciple” means “student”. You tend to attract the type of students who you would make a good teacher for. That means as you live your life following Jesus and take people with you, don’t surprised that you’re making different kinds of disciples that focus on different things, have different skill sets, seem adept at certain areas compared to the kinds of disciples I make. It takes all kinds boys, and God is in the all kinds business. Faithful in the means, let God handle the ends. Timothy, as a teacher, will tend to attract other teachers. Seems good!
Paul then follows with three examples illustrating ways to live for Jesus. First, the picture of a soldier, being about the King’s business and suffering, if need be, to keep on with the mission at hand. Said soldier doesn’t get distracted by other affairs because, again, He’s on the King’s business. Seems like a good reminder. King Jesus says take up your cross and follow me, how often do you get derailed to pick your undies out of your butt crack and to chat up some other loafer who has decided to not be about the King’s business? Watch your distractions, especially the value you give societal work that isn’t related to what God is up to. (In case you need an example, sometimes politics is the Lord’s work, sometimes it’s a pair of undies up your butt crack. Use some discernment.)
Second, an athlete. This one’s pretty simple, if your goal is to win a certain event, you can’t cheat, got to play by the rules. The encouragement here is to be faithful to the way things are done as laid out by the actual judge of the event. Again, faithful in the means, let God handle the ends. We can get this wrong, obviously, if we try to attain the things that represent God-honoring victory in ways that don’t honor God. We can’t gimmick the masses into heaven, we can’t hide things that Jesus says that make people uncomfortable and we can’t act like you can take on the new identity Jesus provides without giving up yourself completely to it. We are faithful in the means because they are good!
Thirdly, the hard-working farmer. This one is more ambiguous because, although Paul provides some level of explanation on the first two, he simply tells Timothy to think on this one and the Lord will provide understanding. It seems right to me here for us to do the same. However, if there are certainties in here given the two examples that came before it, the ultimate point is related to the work done in service of the King and that which is reaped from it. (Some might jump to heavenly rewards here, but I’m not sure that has to be in view. What is the product, the crop of faithful disciple making and Kingdom work? Are there things that this might point to in this life as opposed to being exclusively in the next? Just something to ponder.)
Timothy’s rightful work continues in view, with Paul reminding him of the core gospel. (His gospel? Yeah, it’s the good news that Paul brings, there’s no scandal here.) Paul is suffering, bound up, the the word of God is not bound! (I mean, that’s probably in the top 3 for tattoo options. Freakin’ right the Word is not bound!) What’s Paul getting at? This is the work, man. It’s the work for Paul, it’s the work for Timothy, heck, it’s the work of disciple making. It’ll put you in the straights, people will ignore you, or try to suppress what you’re doing. As we’ve seen elsewhere people who you think were getting it turn on you or start listening to false teaching as soon as you stop giving them attention. It’s a rough deal sometimes. However, it’s done so that folk may be saved from separation from God; that they may be forever with He who loves like no one else. (The trustworthy phrase at the tail end of this is something probably worth memorizing. It’s encouraging, true, convicting, and shows God is better than us at this relationship. All good things to remember.)
You know what’s interesting, starting in verse 14 there’s a bit of a parallel between the examples from earlier. The soldier who isn’t to get distracted with other affairs shows up in, “…not to quarrel about words…”, distracted by things that aren’t essential to what’s going on. There also is a bit of a parallel with the athlete who needs to follow the rules God lays out in, “…avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness.” These aren’t slam dunks but they seem close. I’d feel more comfortable about it intentionality if there was a farm-worker-esque item here, although that would be stealing understanding that the Lord is on the hook for so I guess it wouldn’t make sense to include here either.
We covered this in the Thessalonica letters, but it sounds like that isn’t the only church who is hearing from dudes who ought to know better who are saying that the Day of the Lord has already come and gone and that the resurrection of the dead has already occurred. Why do people do that, tell lies and rile people up? Because even false knowledge is power. Once you know something someone else doesn’t, they will not only look to you to provide it but also how to react to it. It’s how you make disciples of Jesus, but it’s also how you make disciples of yourself. The distinction is the knowledge that you share and its truth. We need a great arbiter to know the difference and God provided it in Scripture. That’s how we know.
I’ll skip a full review on the vessels, just know that you’re supposed to be up to honorable use. Not sure what to pray in the morning? Try, “Lord, how can I be useful to you today? Protect me, keep me so that I may be of honorable use.” That’s not a tattoo, it’s too long and in Chinese it ends up looking like a hut on the back of a turtle.)
The chapter ends in the same vein. What does it look like to serve Jesus and others? It looks like righteousness, faith, love and peace. It looks like a pure heart, avoiding quarrels, kindness, patience in the face of evil, courage and gentleness in correction so that they may repent and know the truth and escape the snare of the devil. You know, I was thinking today of the phrase “Enoch walked with God”. Enoch didn’t sit on his brains and tell God that He was doing cool things while waiting for God to take him to heaven. God is up and about and moving and Enoch is doing the same. Salvation isn’t sedentary, it’s an active relationship with King Jesus. You can have that relationship because he allows it, no other reason. However, now that you’re friends, he gives you good gifts and Kingdom work to do. The best is yet to come, but for now. we walk with God by doing the work. We avoid sin because our King who loves us says it’s bad for us and because it brings junk into His Kingdom. What I’m getting at here is that Christians miss out on a lot of what Jesus offers because we’re sitting down yelling, “Atta boy, Jesus. Salvation! Fist pump!” Do the work. Repent. Be kind. Avoid quarrels. Make disciples. Get into prison or something. It’s not an easy life, but it’s the right one. (Did taking up a cross sound easy to you? Of course not.)