(1Co 1:11-13 ESV) 11 For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brothers. 12 What I mean is that each one of you says, “I follow Paul,” or “I follow Apollos,” or “I follow Cephas,” or “I follow Christ.” 13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
Evidently, Paul had received a visit from a member in Corinth, Chloe, who reported on division within the congregation. And this leads to a four-chapter discussion on congregational unity — a theme that Paul returns to at least in chapter 12 (with respect to gifts). And it may be that other passages are also about the disputes that led to the divisions, but we have no way of knowing for sure. Continue reading
Sunday morning’s class.
You can download the file to play as a Podcast or on an MP3 player –
Download m4a sound file (28 MB)
or as an MP3 –
Download mp3 sound file (51 MB)
or you can stream the audio here:
Not the July 2014 issue, which actually has a typewriter on the cover. Young readers: We used typewriters back before computers were invented. They were made out of T Rex bones.
I subscribe to the Gospel Advocate. I just like keeping up with the more conservative wing of the Churches of Christ, and the Gospel Advocate is pretty typical of the “mainstream” conservative Churches.
In a very interesting turn, the July 2014 issue includes a reprint of a 1968 article by Batsell Barrett Baxter. Baxter was the face of the Churches of Christ in the “Herald of Truth” TV broadcasts of the 1960s and chairman of the Lipscomb Bible department. That is, he was as prominent as one could get in Church of Christ circles.
At the top of the page, this text is quoted in a large font–
Real liberalism is a denial of the existence of God or the denial of the inspiration of the authority of the Bible.
My last post regarding the eternal fate of Gentiles before the time of Jesus was overly long, and Hank — whose questions and comments prompted that post — has responded in detail. The quoted materials are from his response in the comments. (I’ve corrected typos.) And this is going to run long, too.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I must admit, I don’t believe I had ever heard of the position that argued that the pre Christ Gentiles all just died, never to be raised again. No resurrection, no judgment, no reward, no condemnation. Is that what you really believe?
Since the late Second Century, Greek Platonic thought entered into Christian thought. Contrary to the Scriptures, Plato taught that each human has a soul that is innately immortal. If this is so, then we must find a place for the soul of every deceased person, either heaven or hell. The Catholic Church later modified this to add Limbo and Purgatory. Continue reading
[This is a little long. Anyway, it all leads to a question at the end and, I hope, demonstrates the importance of remembering the historical narrative of the Scriptures as we seek to interpret them.]
In comments, long-time reader Hank and I have been trading theories about the salvation of the Gentiles before Jesus. Hank’s theory is agreed with by a few commenters, including one of my favorites – Continue reading
I’m going to leave baptism as a topic with this one last thought. And it’s all about God’s covenant with Abraham (Abram at the time) –
(Gen 15:3–6 ESV) 3 And Abram said, “Behold, you have given me no offspring, and a member of my household will be my heir.” 4 And behold, the word of the LORD came to him: “This man shall not be your heir; your very own son shall be your heir.” 5 And he brought him outside and said, “Look toward heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to number them.” Then he said to him, “So shall your offspring be.” 6 And he believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness.
Recall that this is the text that Paul uses in Rom 4 and Gal 3 to argue that God saves Gentiles by faith because of this very covenant. That’s good, solid narrative, covenant theology. This parallels our own faith in Jesus.
So what happens next? Continue reading
It’s time to pick up some stray thoughts from prior posts and the comments.
A few posts ago, I argued that the “circumcision not made with hands” is the receipt of the Holy Spirit when we’re saved. But I left open v. 12 –
(Col 2:11-12 NET) 11 In him you also were circumcised – not, however, with a circumcision performed by human hands, but by the removal of the fleshly body, that is, through the circumcision done by Christ. 12 Having been buried with him in baptism, you also have been raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead.
Paul associates baptism with the burial of Jesus, as he also does in Rom 6. And I agree with the nearly universal view of commentators that this is not a reference to Holy Spirit baptism. After all, that was the subject of v. 11. Here he is adding to that thought. Continue reading
Imagine that two devout Christians get married, with the preacher, bridesmaids, the whole works. They later have two children. Ten years later, the husband discovers that the preacher forgot to sign the wedding certificate. A lawyer tells him that his marriage is legally invalid (wouldn’t be true in Alabama, but assume it’s true wherever you live). Would it be sin for the man to abandon his “wife” and children, and then go marry a pretty young thing?
Well, to a heartless legalist, the man would be leaving a relationship of fornication and entering into the holy estate of matrimony. But most people would see it as God surely would — as sin. He made a commitment and he needs to keep it. Even though the ceremony was done wrong, he’s bound to his commitment. Continue reading
[This is a rerun from way back in January 2011.]
People need rituals. God doesn’t so much, but people do.
Consider a young couple. The young man embraces his girl friend and for the first time says, “I love you.” She hugs him, smiles, kisses him passionately, and the evening ends.
Later he discusses the evening with a friend over coffee. The friend says, “Wow, it’s great that you have a girlfriend who is so affectionate! Can’t you see in her eyes how much she loves you?”
“Yes, I know she loves me,” the young man says, “but I need her to say that she loves me. In fact, if she won’t say it, I don’t think I can continue in this relationship.” Continue reading
A diatribe on works and revival preaching
One of the great errors of the Christian church is to seek heretics over any and all doctrinal errors, as though our intellects were perfectible (a Gnostic point of view).
Indeed, we can all be just as legalistic about doctrine as the Pharisees were about law keeping. Hence, some exaggerate Paul’s works/faith theology to the point that they feel it’s necessary to insist that we do nothing at all to contribute to our own salvation when preaching to new converts.
We take “not a work” and turn it into “we don’t do anything at all,” which is not really Paul’s point. Some even balk at my teaching that “faith” includes faithfulness, because having a heart turned toward God sounds like “doing something,” but then, so does “believe.” Continue reading