walkworthy.org

Preaching & discipling the whole Gospel and purpse of God worldwide

UNITY: FINDING THE LORD’S MIND TOGETHER – LESSONS FROM ACTS 15 – PART 1 [MONDAY MANNA 148]

by 6 Comments

Dear saints,

Do you yearn with all your heart, as we do here at Walk Worthy, for God’s people to be one? Displaying loving unity amidst the diversity of His body? To receive God’s glory NOW (John 17:22-23) in fullest measure by pleasing His heart in full? Oh, what bliss! Heaven on earth!

Now an even more important question: do you believe in your heart of hearts that it’s possible in your groups? Be it done to us according to our faith?

What does God’s precious word say to us? Fortunately, much more truth than the prevailing wisdom these days in many of His assemblies. Have you heard the repeated familiar refrain that “we’ll never be in unity here”?

Rubbish.

God’s word and the history of diligent dedicated believers teaches us otherwise. Paul commands us in the book of Ephesians through the power of the Holy Spirit to keep maturing in the unity of the faith until completion:

Ephes. 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature which belongs to the fullness of Christ.

And then Paul says to speak to each other directly (not behind each others backs) and “grow up.”

 Ephes. 4:15 but speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in all aspects into Him who is the head, even Christ,

Let’s look backwards then at the earlier beginning verses in this chapter.

Does Paul say it’s perfectly acceptable to blow off your brethren and just walk away because they think differently than you? To reject them without working it out week by week, say, when they vote differently? When they don’t vote at all? When they do speak in tongues, or don’t speak in tongues? When they believe in 5 point Calvinism, or are considered flaming Arminians? When they’re desperately trying to explain their doctrine of the role of women, or money, or loving your enemies, or divorce and remarriage, or not being once saved always saved, or selling your possessions and giving your money to the poor, etc., etc., etc, and etc.?

Do you say to them, or worse, just think, “It’s final! My way or the highway!?”

And then break fellowship for no Biblical reason?

Would Jesus consider you irreconcilable? Now, that’s a huge problem.

 2 Tim. 3:1-5  But realize this, that in the last days difficult times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy, unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, haters of good, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power; avoid such men as these.

Paul implores us to walk worthy, proving our salivation by humility and producing peace in our assembly. And…preserving unity. How rare these days. But it’s natural for the spiritual man guided by our supreme Guide, the Holy Spirit of Jesus.

Ephes. 4:1-3 Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, showing tolerance for one another in love, being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

Show me a man’s diligent actions toward unity and I’ll know if he really, really, really has any true love for Jesus. Talk is cheap, no?

As a body of believers beat up over the years by dozens of so-called saints, both in the institutional and simple house church, we’ve seen multitudes of people come and go. They often change churches like they change their underwear. It’s our culture of choice. Don’t like something?

Just leave, and find something you agree with. A dangerous solution the Father proclaims.

We ourselves made many mistakes over these years trying to learn and follow the Lord’s ways. Indeed we shamefully admit we chased off people we shouldn’t have. The grace to God’s forgiveness is a marvelous thing extended to us!

So, a few years ago, as a body we spent several weeks praying, reading, debating, reflecting, arguing, repenting over Acts 15. Why? It’s a hidden gem of how our brethren in perilous times avoided the first possible church split. And, I’m persuaded,  pleased the Father in a most holy way!

We drew closer as we wrestled it through. We were diligent to stay together as we sought the Lord’s mind. At times, it was not easy, and very hurtful. We were dedicated to Jesus, and in turn, to each other. This was not going to tear us apart. We were learning to be one…to be in unity.

I’m going to show you below our notes from those sessions just as we recorded them. It might take another 2 issues, but we want to listen to God and do a complete job. If you want a copy of the whole study, let me know. Let me know also if you see things we can change for the better. We want to collaborate with you, the body.

Finding the mind of the Lord – Unity Lessons from the Acts 15 gathering

Our goal as overcomers in loving Jesus is acting like Jesus by keeping (Greek word = tereo) his commandments (rules):

1 John 2:3-6  By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him: the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

Then we bring glory to the Father:

John 17:4  “I glorified You on the earth, having accomplished the work which You have given Me

One of the main ways we receive His glory now on this earth (John 17.22, 2 Cor. 3.18, 1 Pt. 1.8, Rom. 8.30, Psalm 8.5, etc.), and then bring glory to Him, is being perfected in unity, especially when we disagree, so that the unsaved world can be led back to God:

John 17:22-23  “The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.

It might be sequenced like this:

  • glory from God now: then when…
  • disagreement arises: we must be…
  • finding the Lord’s mind: which will allow us to be…
  • perfected in unity: which then brings…
  • glory back to God: so then the…
  • unsaved world sees God loves us and Jesus: to result in the…
  • unsaved led back to Him: which fulfills the eternal purpose of God!

Acts 15 situation: reoccurring disagreement over Gentiles salvation (also see Acts 11.2 earlier), i.e. law or grace, how are they saved?

Observations from the narrative:

Verse 1 – Judean men come to Antioch and begin falsely teaching the brethren Gentiles you must be circumcised to be saved

V 2 – Paul (P) and Barnabas (B) have great dissension (rigorous debate) with Judean men; the brethren, and the whole church in Antioch, are involved in decision to send them to Jerusalem to apostles and elders there

Note: the same Greek word used to: 1) describe dissention here in V 2 is also used in the Gospels in Mark 15:7, Luke 23:19, Luke 23:25; 2) describe a riot in Acts 19:40, and 3) more dissension between the Pharisees and Sadducees, Paul and crowds in Acts 23:7, Acts 23:10,  Acts 24:5

V 3 – great joy as P & B relay the Gentiles conversion; notice no mention of any complaints over the debate

V 4 – P & B welcomed and received by the church and the apostles and elders

V 6, 7 – Much debate between P & B and apostles and elders

V 12 – “All the people” indicates the whole gathering, the body, was there (see v 4) as P & B relay signs and wonders God performed among Gentiles, a proof of His pleasure in them

V 13 – James waits until after P & B had stopped speaking, assuming uninterrupted speech

V 22 – Seemed “good” (vs. direct speaking from Holy Spirit like Acts 13.2) to apostles, elders, with whole gathering to choose other men to accompany P & B back to Antioch with the letter detailing the 3 points

The Church’s Decree, Craig Keener in IVP Bible Background Commentary

15:22. When views were disputed in the later rabbinic academies, the majority view always prevailed; here a partial compromise (in favor of the Antioch church) seems to command consensus. Other Jewish groups also had “general sessions,” such as at Qumran, where the priests, elders and people would gather.

V 25 – “having become one mind” – they worked at it, some maybe putting aside their claims in favor on a broader unity

V 31 – whole Antioch congregation gathered, and greatly rejoiced because of its encouragement

Their methods were reflective of the kingdom of God:

  1. Wanted and went seeking the Lord’s mind, the Truth
  2. Humble in heart, poor in spirit, but not silent or shy and retiring
  3. Listened and questioned – seek to understand first, then to be understood
  4. Discuss, debate, “not a little” the Word says in V 2
  5. Willing to put aside some differences, but not put aside sin in peoples life, i.e. not OK to let the Judeans keep preaching that false message, or people trying to live it
  6. Prayer, council, get opinions

And…the first possible church split is avoided!

More next time as the “unity” saga continues in Part 2…

UNITY: FINDING THE LORD’S MIND TOGETHER – PART 2 [MONDAY MANNA 149]

Please comment on this post right below. Feel free to write and proclaim your leadings in the Spirit in an honorable fashion.

Your friend and brother in fighting the good fight,

Marc

+++

Saints, we’re one day closer to Home, and Him! Love Him wholeheartedly!

You may view our Archives here: MONDAY MANNA – ARCHIVES;   Complete Archives; feel free to write and proclaim your leadings in the Spirit in an honorable fashion. May our Father richly bless you with His grace, through Jesus Christ our Lord, in order to walk worthy of His name.

Please comment on this post right below. Feel free to write and proclaim your leadings in the Spirit in an honorable fashion.

 

 

 

 

BEING CAREFUL WITH HIS WORD: HIGH CONTEXT (MID-EAST) & LOW CONTEXT (WESTERN) SOCIETIES [RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD 2]

by 6 Comments

Dear brethren,

This series is dedicated to protecting god’s sheep against biblical misinterpretation by contrasting the true truth. If you’re not diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman, you’ll be ashamed, therefore be rightly dividing His word.

Many times, like you I suppose, I’ve run into a “someone” who’s a “I’ve got Jesus in my heart so I really know the Bible” type who make bold faced, goofy statements about the Bible as obvious fact. And then they refuse to discuss it with “anyone.” End of conversation, they declare. It’s “clear” they proclaim.

Oh?

Even if the Holy Spirit has led that “anyone” a bit further than that “someone” in the learned art of Biblical exegesis (discovering the original, intended meaning) and hermeneutics (seeking the contemporary relevance) with the sacred scriptures, it’s an unloving, dishonorable, disrespectful act to cast off the others opinion.

Next time any “someone” pulls that on you, I suggest popping these two questions:

“You certainty seemed convinced. If the Holy Spirit of Jesus would bring you a new truth that completely contradicts your cherished beliefs, what would you do?”

And…

“You know, in His Word is says ‘And they crucified Him.’ No explanation, and no description of this heinous act. If not for our modern day commentaries, we’d be clueless on what it meant. Why do you suppose God wrote it that way?”

Hopefully, they’re be full of grace when responding. Often, they resemble a deer caught in the headlights. But it does get them thinking, and trustfully under the conviction of the Spirit that there’s two sides to any coin!

Is this important? Well, in James 3.1 our brother states teachers will receive the greater judgment-condemnation. Sounds important to God to warn us in this fashion.

Our dear brothers Bruce Malina and Richard Rohrbaugh have labored long and hard in His vineyard by providing excellent resources for us to proclaim the true truth. Their work Social Science Commentary on The Synoptic Gospels ought to be in everybody’s library. Yes, and I mean everybody. Without tools like this, you’ll stay trapped in American Christianity, as I was for the first few years of my walk with God. But I escaped! With the help of Jesus, He opened a whole new vista to His meaning and purpose.

This piece is from the Introduction and is vital to us living in a low context, fiercely independent, individualistic society. Enjoy…but also act on it by proclaiming these truths to others.

High and Low Context Societies by Malina and Rohrbaugh

…..The New Testament was written in what anthropologists call a “high-context” society. People who communicate with each other in high-context societies presume a broadly shared, well-understood knowledge of the context of anything referred to in conversation or in writing. For example, everyone in ancient Mediterranean villages would have had a clear and concrete knowledge of what sowing entailed, largely because the skills involved were shared by most (male) members of that society. No writer would need to explain.

Thus writers in such societies usually produce sketchy and impressionistic writings, leaving much to the reader’s or hearer’s imagination. They also encode much information in widely known symbolic or stereotypical statements. In this way, they require the reader to fill in large gaps in the unwritten portion of the writing. All readers are expected to know the context and therefore to understand the references in question.

In this way, the Bible, like most documents written in the high-context Mediterranean world, presumes readers to have a broad and adequate knowledge of its social context. It offers little by way of extended explanation. When Luke writes that Elizabeth was “called barren” (1:36), for example, he feels no necessity to explain for the reader the critical imperatives of ancient kinship, or the position of barren women in the village life of agrarian societies, or the function of the gossip networks in an honor-shame context, even though little of this information is known to modern readers of his story. All of this, however, is critical to understanding his statement about Elizabeth’s being barren. Luke simply assumed his readers would understand.

By contrast, “low-context” societies are those that produce highly specific and detailed documents that leave little for the reader to fill in or supply. The United States and northern Europe are typical low-context societies. Accordingly, Americans and northern Europeans expect writers to give the necessary background if they refer to something unusual or atypical. A computer operator, for example, learns a certain jargon and certain types of logic (e.g., Boolean) that are not widely understood outside the circle of computer initiates.

Within that circle these concepts can be used without explanation because the explanations are easily supplied by any competent reader of technical computer manuals. They can remain a part of the “unwritten” text that the writer expects a reader to supply. But since they are not yet part of the experience of the general public, when writing for a nontechnical audience a writer must explain the computer jargon and the technical information at some length if he or she wants to be understood.

A moment’s reflection will make clear why modern industrial societies are low context and ancient agrarian ones were high-context. The difficulties a general American audience has with computer jargon alluded to immediately above are all too common an experience in modern life. Life today has complexified into a thousand spheres of experience that the general public does not share in common.

There are small worlds of experience in every corner of our society that the rest of us know nothing about. Granted, there is much in our writing that needs no explanation because it relates to experience all Americans can understand. But nowadays the worlds of the engineer, the plumber, the insurance salesman, and the farmer are in large measure self-contained. Should anyone of these people write for “the layperson” who is not an engineer, plumber, insurance salesman, or farmer, he or she would have much to explain.

It was very different in antiquity, however, where change was slow and where the vast majority of the population had the common experience of farming the land and dealing with landlords, traders, merchants, and tax collectors. People had more in common and experience was far less discrepant. Thus writers could more nearly count on readers to fill in the gaps from behaviors socialized in a common world.

The obvious problem this creates for reading the Bible today is that low-context readers in the United States frequently mistake the Bible for a low-context document and erroneously assume the author has provided all of the contextual information needed to understand it. Consider how many U.S. and northern European people believe the Bible is a perfectly adequate and thorough statement of Christian life and behavior!

Such people assume they are free to fill in the gaps from their own experience because, if that were not the case, the New Testament writers, like any considerate low-context authors, would have provided the unfamiliar background a reader requires. Unfortunately, this is rarely the case because expectations of what an author will provide (or has provided) are markedly different in modern and agrarian societies.

Recontextualization

Thinking about American readers reading Mediterranean writings requires us to clarify the situation one step further. We have already suggested that each time a writing is read by a new reader, the fields of reference tend to shift and multiply because of the reader’s cultural location. Among some literary theorists this latter phenomenon is called “Recontextualization.”

This term refers to the multiple ways different readers may “complete” a text as a result of reading it over against their different social contexts. (Written documents may also be “decontextualized” when read a historically for their aesthetic or formal characteristics.)

Of course, such Recontextualization is a familiar phenomenon to students of the Synoptic Gospels. A simple reading of Luke 1:1-4 will make it clear that the Gospel documents contain what the author says that people before him said that Jesus said and did. Obviously, the actions and teachings of Jesus were remembered, reappropriated, and reapplied for some fifty years in the life of the Hellenistic church before the author of Luke wrote down his version of the story. Thus each point between Jesus and Luke at which the story was told anew was a new step in the process of Recontextualization.

This same thing can be seen in the work of redaction critics who have shown us how shifts in the settings of the parables of Jesus in various Gospels have altered their emphasis and/or meaning (e.g., the parable of the Lost Sheep in Matt 18: 12-13; Luke 15:4-6; Thomas 98:22-27). In whatever measure these Synoptic Recontextualization of the Jesus story “complete” the text differently than an original hearer of Jesus might have done, an interpretative step of significant proportions has been taken.

The same is true for Recontextualization into the world of the modern reader. Indeed, the concern of our entire commentary is exactly this phenomenon of moving the text from the Mediterranean culture-continent in which it was written to the new setting in the Western, industrialized societies where it is now read. The outcome will be another Recontextualization.  Our thesis is that this particular Recontextualization, this modernization of the text, is profoundly social in character, and that readers socialized in the industrial world are unlikely to complete the text of the New Testament in ways the ancient authors could have imagined.

In sum, we insist that meanings realized in reading written documents inevitably derive from a social system. Reading is always a social act. If both reader and writer share the same social system, the same experience, adequate communication is highly probable. But if either reader or writer come from mutually alien social systems, then as a rule, nonunderstanding, or at best misunderstanding, will be the rule.

Because this is so, understanding the range of meanings that would have been plausible to a first-century reader of the Synoptic Gospels requires the contemporary reader to seek access to the social system(s) available to the original audience.

Moreover, to recover these social systems, in whatever measure possible, we believe it essential to employ adequate, explicit, social-science models that have been drawn especially from circum-Mediterranean studies. Only so can we complete the written texts as considerate readers who, for better or worse, have imported them into an alien world.

+++

Please comment on this post right below. Feel free to write and proclaim your leadings in the Spirit in an honorable fashion.

Your friend and brother in fighting the good fight,

Marc

+++

Saints, we’re one day closer to Home, and Him! Love Him wholeheartedly!

You may view our Archives here: RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD – ARCHIVES;   Complete Archives; feel free to write and proclaim your leadings in the Spirit in an honorable fashion. May our Father richly bless you with His grace, through Jesus Christ our Lord, in order to walk worthy of His name.

 

 

 

ACTIVELY DEFENDING YOURSELF LIKE PAUL & JESUS [DEAR BRETHREN 3]

by Leave a Comment

Dear brother,

Thanks for your concern over the Word Of God. Yes, we’d agree with you here at Walk Worthy that there’s 2 huge issues coloring the action of God’s church here in the West. Of course, we in America export our stuff, for good and evil, to the world.

These issues are popular mistaken notions and they play out like this:

  1. Jesus never defended Himself so neither should we.
  2. We just need to let God work in anothers life and be nice to them.

Both of these seem to stem from a New Age philosophy that’s so predominant in the church today of just getting along and letting God do all the work, in addition to all the heavy lifting. It follows then that we shouldn’t get involved. This has been around for some time.

Even Francis of Assisi (1181-1226) got into the game by saying something like, “Preach Jesus, and only use words if necessary.” Of course, he meant live a holy life in all your actions. Agreed. But Jesus was perfect, and He proclaimed the kingdom of God every waking moment orally.

I’m a big fan of Francis’ commitment, but this quotation of his, if quoted accurately, is dead wrong. Sounds good on the surface of our culture, but doesn’t fly in the face of Scripture. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ (Rom. 10.17). Of course words are necessary, often for initial redemption and for continued holiness.

Your situation, dear brother, is common, tragically common. You’ve been maligned for being too “harsh and argumentative.” You’re wondering if the problem is you, and have the notion of giving up and just being silent after years and years of opposition. Of course, and this following verse is not “nice,” but you’re not to cast your pearls before swine or give what is holy to the dogs (Matt. 7.6). But we should at least make an attempt until they prove themselves pigs and dogs. What church preaches on this fact and in this graphic detail like Jesus? We need to be certain we are led by the Spirit.

But Jesus wants us to proclaim what we hear upon the housetops (Luke 12.3).

Now, admonishment in general to perfect the saints is not in vogue whatsoever. But if you persist in exposing these escalating travesties since perfecting holiness in the fear of God (2 Cor. 7.1) is the calling of saints, the excruciating tolerance you encounter allows sin to leaven the whole loaf. But we understand and empathize with your bewilderment and frustration, as the opposition and downward slide increases seemingly unabated. Is God really at work? Yes…but His hands are often tied to move like He’d like…to enact His plan A.

I know a few followers of Jesus who rightly but lovingly call unbelievers “fools.” But those lost souls don’t have the equipment to be wise. Yet, these same believers would never call a so-called fellow believer a “fool.” Why not? Too harsh. Not nice. Yet, the very use of the various types of fools in the Word is much more stringent on those who claim to know God. And how much more does God now require since we have the indwelling Holy Spirit…and not to insult the Spirit of grace (Heb. 10.29)? Besides, Paul used the term as far as we know with at least two of his church plants.

Now we all acknowledge with thankfulness any holiness (right standing with God) that is positionally received is from Christ alone and a free gift. We also know that being holy in all our behavior (1 Peter 1.15) emanates from the power of Christ in us through His Holy Spirit. But nonetheless, without pursing holiness no one will see the Lord (Heb. 12.4). That last part, at least, is not automatic and needs our willful participation.

Let’s look at the first popular error about Jesus that He never defended Himself.

We don’t understand as we should the declarative action that both Paul and Jesus used throughout their ministries to proclaim and defend the true truth to the bitter but joyous end. Nice people who ride the fence and tolerate (even promote) bad behavior in God’s church never get killed. All the apostles met that end. And certainly Jesus was murdered…the most gracious human being to ever walk the planet. But that grace was despised by the stonewallers.

Chuck Colson, the head of Prison Fellowship, is on record as saying if Jesus came again today, the church would kill Him again. Oh boy….

Jesus was silent for a spell before His accusers. It’s the Middle Eastern way of stealing honor from them to Himself. It was a cunning move. He was refusing to give credence to their lives. When He did speak, they were infuriated. Pilate was fearful when confronted with the fact that he would have no power over Jesus if not given to him by the Father.

But what about that “not reviling” verse, we’re told.

“…and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously” 1 Peter 2:23

Notice it says He didn’t revile in return. But He did defend Himself, which was His mission, character, and holiness in the name of God the Father.

Back to Paul now and his wayward disciples in some groups. So, the Corinthians had a fierce independent spirit. They were often irreconcilable. They were thinking themselves super-spiritual, and yet they unloving abused the spiritual gifts, were idolatrous, and served mammon mostly. As in greed. And idolatry and greed always seem tied together.

What did Paul say to them in 1 Corinthians actuality? Praise them for good works? Take a retreat? Fast for 40 days? Get a new pastor? Change churches? Pray in their closet for an indeterminable amount of time for new revelation?

No.

None of those.

He basically told them, “Stop it. And do this…”

That’s it.

They supposedly had the Holy Spirit. They had Paul’s teaching. He left them in good shape. And in the space of a few short 3-4 years, they had drifted away into no man’s land, and were in eventual danger of being shipwrecked in regards to their faith. Serious stuff.

Paul’s apostleship is under attack. His gospel is under attack. House church leaders are causing the sheep to embrace weird, demonic ideas and lifestyles. They think, as previously said, they’re much more spiritual than Paul as told them by false leaders. The gospel of Jesus Christ is under siege. Nothing new under the sun.

Gordon Fee, our brother who wrote one of the best commentaries on this crucial Bible book, puts it this way:

Paul is taking them on at every turn. There is little to suggest that he is either informing or merely correcting; instead, he is attacking and challenging with all the weapons in his literary arsenal. If 1 Corinthians is a response to their letter, in which they are asking Paul to arbitrate their differences, then one must judge him to have misread their letter rather considerably.

The letter in its entirety is addressed to the whole church, with no suggestion that he is speaking now to one group, and then to another. Nearly everything is in the second person plural, except for a few instances where he shifts to the second singular, perhaps with some specific person(s) in view. If Paul were settling differences among them, one would expect at least some word to that effect. But there is none.

Let’s take a jet tour of Paul’s approach toward the Corinthians. Be especially sensitive to line up his tactics with the current “religion of niceness” in our church body. Does he try to win friends and influence people like we’re taught to do? Is he catching more flies with honey than vinegar?

We do know that 2nd Corinthians has a bit more open to Paul’s heart, although much (most?) of it is still argumentative and demeaning as we would define it. Why is he different in this piece? They repented of a few things and began following again his ways in Christ. At least a bit. So, then…does the end justify his means?

How, then, should we act with a church like this? And it’s people? What is God’s prescription, His Rx if you will?

Now, dear brother, it’s my personal opinion that the Western church is much more feisty and religiously sinful than Corinth in its day. We hardly ever hear these days of corporate repentance after being openly admonished by another group or a modern day apostle. So, if Paul gives us a clue here with the Corinthians in how to act for the best result, and is he wasn’t in sin for this direct approach, then how then should we act with each other?

You must be the judge. Before we meet the Judge…

Chapter 1

  • v 1-9: normal customary mid-east greeting even like in Galatians 1.1-5 to a real messed up situation once again
  • v 10: all must agree
  • v 11: Chloe’s people “tattled” on the church
  • v 17-31: gospel is the cross and not clever in speech like the leaders vilifying him

Chapter 2

  • v 1-15: his preaching is not in wisdom (like the others) but in the power of God, insinuating theirs is not
  • v 16: we collectively have the mind of Christ…if we’re united

Chapter 3

  • v 1-4: he calls them infants, fleshly men for the strife among them, derides them for calling themselves by denominational names and having a party spirit
  • v 5-15 defends his apostleship and past work with them since they’re listening to their own press that they’re more spiritual
  • v 16-23: God will destroy them if they destroy the body God is building through Paul’s efforts, he tells them to stop being worldly wise for that makes them fools

Chapter 4

  • v 1-7: Paul defends himself again this accusers, as much as calling them arrogant since they regard themselves as superior when clearly they aren’t
  • v 8-13: he uses deep sarcasm contrasting his life with theirs (we’d call this “prideful” of Paul to say he was better than them)
  • v 14 -21: he says he desires to admonish them, they should imitate him and stop all the words but show action, and warns them he could come with a rod vs. loving gentleness (Brother Fee wisely points out the rod is love too – but not to foolish people)

Chapter 5

  • v 1-13: Paul tells them to turn over the immoral believer to Satan to destroy his flesh (wow – talk about not nice), calling them arrogant again, and not to associate with so-called believers who practice sin, even the covetousness and greedy so prevalent in our own churches today

Chapter 6

  • v 1-8: don’t take other believers to court – no praise here – just more admonishment
  • v 9-20: Paul tells them to stop the adultery with prostitutes, and that all sorts of listed sins will cause them to end up in hell – oops…

Chapter 7

  • V 1-9: he says for the married to have frequent sexual relations since it seems there are certain women who were freezing their men out by being super spiritual
  • V 10-40: the dysfunction and divorce rate in the church was epidemic much as ours today, he gives bold instructions on widows, the unmarried, and essentially setting this church straight from their own “wisdom”

Chapter 8

  • v 1-13: he decries their practice of causing other weak believers to stumble by eating meat sacrificed to idols, the weak here are actually trying to walk as holy as possible by not associating with their past idolatrous practices, he says he’d never eat meat again if causing anyone to stumble – which is the whole point of love and carried on for the rest of the letter

Chapter 9

  • v 1-23: Paul gives up his right to $ from preaching the gospel so as not to be accused as being under the thumb of a patron, again not wanting anyone to stumble
  • v 24-27: he amplifies his argument by saying he beats his body into submission so he himself might not be lost – or disqualified

Chapter 10

  • V 1-33: Paul gives the somber recount of God’s awful dealing with the Israelites in the wilderness, telling us all we can escape every  temptation, not to cause others to stumble by eating idol sacrificed food, and not to slander those who are playing it squeaky clean…for that is fleshly and unloving

Chapter 11

  • v 1-34: he takes them on for poor meeting behavior, they must hold to his traditions and not others, deals with women and head coverings, many divisions that must exist to show those who are approved, taking the Lord’s Supper (a full meal every time they meet in the homes) unselfishly so the Lord won’t have to bring sickness to kill them – wow, some are even drunk – sounds like real wine to me, folks

Chapter 12

  • v 1-31: Paul slams their overemphasis on tongues at the expense of true love in the body, all parts are crucial to God’s design especially the non-flashy, they’re selfishly calling attention to one gift and foolishly calling it the most anointed and wise, and he then leads them to the real love

Chapter 13

  • v 1-13: he again slams the tongues and others gifts when not practicing love and unity – when they make themselves out to be foolishly superior with their tongues, bearing all things does not mean (as Gordon Fee states) thinking the best about everyone and everything – but God’s love means never losing the faith and hope that God will work in routing sin from lives.

Chapter 14

  • v 1-40: he commands them to pursue prophecy and use tongues properly vs. their foolish overemphasis on tongues, in group meetings secrets of the heart are be disclosed, all participants in meetings are to be involved and not allow tongue speakers to hijack the meetings, group tongues without interpretations (like today’s church) is rampant in certain circles and is not to happen unless an interpreter is present for one speaker at a time, if not they will continue to be out of order and fleshly

Chapter 15

  • V 1-58: as if that was not enough immaturity, foolishness, and lack of love, Paul then attacks their new thinking that downplays and disbelieves the resurrection, he tells them to don’t hang around with bad company, to be sober (not “full of fun” as we hear so much today), he calls them fools to their face (the top “not nice” tactic I presume), and accentuates Christ’s triumph in the resurrection

Chapter 16

  • v 1-9: he instructs them to start collecting $ for the needy saints in Jerusalem (which we know by 2 Corinthians that they didn’t do)
  • v 10-24: he tells them to take care of the saints that pass through, be alert – stand firm – act like men (since they seemed not to be practicing this well), and ends by saying if no one loves the Lord – he is to be cursed or damned…wow, what a note to end on…come quickly Lord Jesus – Maranatha

So, dear brother, what can we say to recap? Both Jesus and Paul certainly and definitively defended their right and credentials in front of sinful unbelievers and believers.

This book is not the only example we have of this type of frontal assault on sin to purify God’s church. Most of the Scripture is corrective….that is, don’t do that but do this. Paul, like Jesus, was not vague!

When dealing with sinful churches and their leaders, up front and deliberate action that certainly looks like aggression to us is the order of the day. Certainly they’re believes in these churches hard after God, or at least one! But the atmosphere of the book is dicey…and argumentative.

Loving, selfless, thoughtful unity is the theme in 1 Corinthians. Paul seems to spare nothing with them as both guns are blazing. He loves them and wants them to make it. They’re in significant trouble as it stands now. Woe to him if he doesn’t preach the Gospel.

And Paul loves and fears God more than the hurt of rejection and persecution.

How about us? Do we love as Paul loved? Or as Jesus? Or do we need to begin?

The grace of God is more than sufficient to equip, enlighten, embolden, and accomplish the Word that He wants to send through us. Let us be imitators of Paul and each other as we follow Christ. Let us be identified as a little Christ, a Christian, first and foremost…and as a active member of the Kingdom of God. Not primarily with our country.

Let us open our mouths and speak the very words of Life. Let us no longer believe the words of the enemy. Let us display holy boldness in fear and trembling. Do we really hate sin and love mature righteousness that pleases Him and puts the devil to flight?

Here we are, Father. Send us. Jesus, by Your Spirit, we pray God’s will be done on earth…with us first.

Take care, dear brother…keep going…preach the word in season and out…be ready to always ask other brothers about your message…and make adjustments and amends when the Spirit confirms.

And let’s remember we’re in this together…until the end of the age.

Please comment on this post right below. Feel free to write and proclaim your leadings in the Spirit in an honorable fashion.

Your friend and brother in fighting the good fight,

Marc

+++

Saints, we’re one day closer to Home, and Him! Love Him wholeheartedly!

Marc and Walk Worthy are supported in part by the body of Jesus Christ. Please consider donating on a regular basis:

www.WalkWorthy.org/donate

You may view our Archives here: DEAR BRETHREN – ARCHIVES;   Complete Archives. May our Father richly bless you with His grace, through Jesus Christ our Lord, in order to walk worthy of His name.

Please comment on this post right below. Feel free to write and proclaim your leadings in the Spirit in an honorable fashion.

Marc White, Director, Walk Worthy Ministries, www.WalkWorthy.org