Ethan R. Longhenry's Blog, page 46

The Letter to the Hebrews

Some Christians were in great need of encouragement. Yes, they should have been more spiritually mature by this time, but their resolve was wearing thin. They needed to be reminded of the superiority of what God had accomplished in Christ, and to stand firm. To this end the letter to the Hebrews was written.

The letter to the Hebrews is the nineteenth book in modern editions of the New Testament. At no point in the letter does the author identify himself or specific recipients of the letter; he is known to the letter’s recipients, sends greetings from Christians in Italy, and he planned to visit them with Timothy in the near future (Hebrews 13:23-24). For this reason many throughout time considered Paul as its author; his apostolic authority lent credence to the letter and explains its presence in the canon. Barnabas and Apollos are also viable candidates for authorship, but we cannot identify the author with any certainty. The letter is called “to the Hebrews” since its content suggests its recipients need reminding of the superiority of the new covenant to the old covenant, a message which Jewish Christians would need to hear. Perhaps these Jewish Christians lived in Judea and Jerusalem; perhaps the letter was designed to be distributed among all the Jewish Christians in the dispersion. The appeal to the message of the Apostles in the past tense in Hebrews 2:3-4, the present consideration of the Temple service in Hebrews 9:1-10, and the reference to Italy from someone traveling in Pauline circles in Hebrews 13:23-24 strongly suggest the letter was written in the 60s, although any date before 70 remains possible. The letter to the Hebrews was written to encourage Christian, most likely of a Jewish heritage, to grow in their faith and stand firm in it without reverting to Judaism.

The letter to the Hebrews has no standard epistolary opening: its author began with a powerful declaration of God having spoken first through the prophets now spoke through His Son, through whom He created the world, who manifests the image of His substance, and who upholds all things (Hebrews 1:1-3). Through appeals to many passages in the Old Testament the Hebrews author demonstrated Jesus’ superiority to the angels, recognizing the latter as spirits ministering for the sake of the saved (Hebrews 1:4-14). And so, if the Law, mediated by angels, had strong consequences, how much more for those who spurn the message of Jesus through the Apostles, whose message was affirmed abundantly through the work of the Spirit (Hebrews 2:1-4)? God has subjected the world underneath Jesus’ feet, who became man in order to be as an elder brother and save mankind as a merciful and faithful high priest (Hebrews 2:5-18). Moses was faithful in his work as a servant, but Jesus came as the faithful Son, thus worthy of more glory, and whose house Christians can become by faith and endurance (Hebrews 3:1-6). The Hebrews author then meditated on Psalm 95:1-11: believers must make sure none are falling away, deceived by sin, like the generation of Israel in the Wilderness (Hebrews 3:7-19). The weekly Sabbath is not the rest of Psalm 95:11; there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, the full rest from work as God took after the creation, and Christians must diligently seek to enter it; Christians must prove obedient, for the word of God is living and active, and no creature is hidden from God’s sight (Hebrews 4:1-13).

The core of the letter to the Hebrews featured discussions of Jesus as the high priest in the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 4:14-10:31). The Hebrew author exhorted Christians to hold fast to their confession because of Jesus as their high priest, tempted in all points yet without sin (Hebrews 4:14-16). The Hebrews author explained the nature of the Aaronic high priesthood in the Old Testament, and identified Jesus as the high priest in the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 5:1-10). As an aside the Hebrew author chastised the letter’s recipients as having not yet reached maturity despite their time in the faith; he would press on beyond the fundamental issues (Hebrews 5:11-6:3). Those who turn aside deeply endanger their salvation, but the Hebrews author remained convinced of better things regarding his audience; God swore by Himself to assure Abraham of salvation, and Christians have the assurance of Jesus the high priest in the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 6:4-20). The Hebrews author then explained who Melchizedek is and how Jesus was a high priest like him, superior to the Aaronic and Levitical priesthoods (Hebrews 7:1-28 ; cf. Genesis 14:18-20). Jesus proved to be high priest by offering Himself once for all, a mediator of a new and better covenant under better promises, as prophesied by Jeremiah (Hebrews 1:1-13; cf. Jeremiah 31:31-34). The Hebrews author explains the nature of offering and atonement under the old covenant as the earthly copy of the heavenly reality, and then identified Jesus’ sacrifice as sanctifying that reality once for all; the blood of Jesus is superior to the blood of bulls and goats, and inaugurated the new covenant (Hebrews 9:1-10:18). On account of Jesus’ sacrifice Christians can boldly draw near to God in Christ, not wavering in confession and not forsaking the assembling of one another; those who turn aside after learning of the truth face severe consequences (Hebrews 10:19-31).

The Hebrew author worked diligently to encourage those receiving the letter (Hebrews 10:32-13:25). They must remember the sufferings they experienced earlier and maintain patience to receive the promise (Hebrews 10:32-39). He then spoke of the nature of faith and illustrated it through the trust of the men and women of old, the heroes of faith, who persisted in the promise despite difficulties in the present (Hebrews 11:1-38). They did not receive the promise; Christians have (Hebrews 11:39-40). Christians thus do well to look toward Jesus, run the race without becoming weary, endure the discipline of the Lord, pursue sanctification, watching out for the profane, come to Mount Zion, not Sinai, and not refuse God who speaks in Christ, for He is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:1-19). Christians do well to serve God faithfully, loving each other, showing hospitality, remembering the disadvantaged, honoring marriage, finding contentment in what they have, following the pattern of those who taught them the truth, obeying their leaders, praying for them and the author (Hebrews 13:1-7, 15-19). Jesus remains unchanged; thus His people should not be led astray by false teachings, willing to bear Jesus’ reproach, seeking the Kingdom (Hebrews 13:8-14). Having prayed to God in Christ to grant his audience maturity to accomplish His will, the Hebrews author identified his purpose in exhorting them in a few words, spoke of Timothy’s release, indicated a desire to see them with him, gave greetings from all in Italy, and provided a standard epistolary conclusion (Hebrews 13:20-25).

We can only hope that the Hebrews author’s original audience found the letter as encouraging and insightful as their fellow Christians have ever since; the letter to the Hebrews provides a wealth of theological insights, exegetical constructions, and compelling exhortations which Christians can mine over and over again for profit and edification. May we hold fast to our confession, take solace in Jesus as our high priest, and live to glorify God!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Letter to the Hebrews appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Edification

What is it then, brethren? When ye come together, each one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath a tongue, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying (1 Corinthians 14:26).

If you hang around Christians or a church long enough chances are you will hear someone talk about “edification” or being “edified.” Edification is a term used frequently by Christians yet not nearly as often in society in general. What is edification all about?

In English, edification has come to mean “the instruction or improvement of a person morally or intellectually,” according to the Internet dictionary. Merriam-Webster’s dictionary agrees, also recognizing “to build or establish” as an archaic meaning. Edification or “to edify” translate the Greek terms oikodome and oikodomeo. These terms are rooted in the language of construction: their basic meaning is “a building” or “to build,” respectively, and even in the New Testament are occasionally used to describe physical structures or their construction (e.g. Matthew 23:29, Mark 13:1-2). Therefore, as Thayer’s Lexicon notes, these terms become metaphorically used to describe a spiritual construction, or building up, of people: “to promote, or the act of one who promotes another’s growth in, Christian wisdom, piety, happiness, holiness.” The English term ends up where the spiritual use of the Greek intended to go.

Edification, therefore, is about building up other people in Christ and being built up in Christ, not unlike the process by which a building is built. The Apostles encouraged Christians to think in these terms: they spoke of individual Christians and the church as temples of God in whom the Spirit of God dwells (1 Corinthians 3:16-17, 6:19-20), and envisioned the church as a temple founded on the Lord Jesus as cornerstone and the apostles and prophets and being edified, or built up, through the efforts of Christians (Ephesians 2:20-22). Paul considered the work of the church in general terms as the means by which it edifies, or builds itself up, in love (Ephesians 4:12, 16).

But what does this edification process look like? The prophets and Apostles were given, and shepherds, evangelists, and teachers continue to be given, the task of equipping Christians for the work of ministering and to thus build up the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-12). Thus, we can be built up in faith through the words of the prophets and Apostles as well as from the instruction, mentoring, and encouragement we receive from shepherds, preachers, and teachers. All things which Christians do in their assemblies are to be done unto edifying (1 Corinthians 14:26). Therefore, sermons, class instruction, prayers, songs, the Lord’s Supper, and the collection are to be done in ways that facilitate the edification of all Christians present. For this reason Paul insisted that all messages be comprehensible to the Christians present, for how can Christians be edified in their faith if they have no understanding what was said (1 Corinthians 14:3-19)? All Christians are to work to build up and edify their neighbor (Romans 15:2): the work of edification is not limited to the assembly, but should also be practiced as we have opportunity to provide a word of instruction or strength, pray, or provide some other meaningful gesture which strengthens the faith of our fellow Christian. By extension we ought to live as the light of the world so as to give those who are outside of the faith reason to believe and come to repentance in Christ Jesus (Matthew 5:13-16).

We do well to note the disconnect between the Biblical concept of edification and the casual way the term is often used today in “Christendom.” Many times people will speak of an intensely emotional or sensory spiritual experience as “edifying”; many people will consider themselves “edified” when they experienced a spiritual or emotional high. Whereas there may be times for such emotional experiences, if there is nothing substantively gained in faith, no compelling moral instruction grounded in Scripture, or no real strengthening of faith experienced, it is not “edification.” It was an emotional high. While we should not disengage our emotions from our spirituality, an experience need not be highly emotional to be edifying. We can know if a given spiritual experience is truly edifying by whether a substantive addition has been made to our faith on account of it: if another brick has been added to our spiritual temple, so to speak. Thus, just because someone says a thing is “edifying” does not make it so in reality; we have been warned that not all things edify (1 Corinthians 10:23).

Edification is a crucial element of our faith and working together as the body of Christ in the church. Edification, after all, is one of the primary means by which we are to influence one another for good and be influenced in turn (Ephesians 4:11-16). Christians must pursue those things which truly edify in the faith: participating jointly in activities surrounding the faith, the acts of the assembly, and preaching, teaching, praying, singing, and giving in other contexts. Christians must give thought to how they speak so as to make sure their words will truly build up and not tear down or cause other hindrances (Ephesians 4:29). There may be times when tearing down is necessary so as to build more properly on the foundation, but demolition without reconstruction only serves Satan’s purposes. Thus all things should be done so as to build up (1 Corinthians 14:26).

Christians do well to hold to both the original metaphorical concept behind edification as well as its practical meaning in life and faith. Edification demands building up, adding on to a construction project. As we speak with each other, exhort each other, instruct each other, pray for each other, etc., we should envision ourselves as seeking to help fortify and build each other’s “building,” and receive assistance in building up our “buildings” as well. It is not for us to tear down other’s “buildings” through judgmental attitudes, indifference, neglect, undue chastisement or rebuke, or through hasty or angry words (Ephesians 4:25-29, James 4:11-12). If we are reduced to petty infighting or strife on account of selfish ambition, strife, jealousy, or envy, and tear down each other’s work in Christ on account of it, only Satan wins! And yet we must turn to God in Christ in Scripture to understand what precisely can build that “building”; it is not mere emotional experience but substantive messages which promote growth in Christian faith, virtue, and character. May we all seek to edify each other and thus build up the body of Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Edification appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Christian and Liberality

Within many sectors of “Christendom” the word “liberal” has become derogatory and used often as a slur. Such is tragic, since according to the Lord Jesus, all who do not prove liberal will be condemned (Matthew 25:41-46)! Jesus did not refer to those who were liberal in terms of departing from the faith, of course; we speak here of a “liberal” as one who gives with liberality, freely. Previously He commended all those who proved thus liberal and welcomed them into eternity in the resurrection (Matthew 25:34-45). Yet those who did not do so were condemned and cast into eternal punishment!

Early Christians took Jesus’ lesson to heart. They were known for liberality in giving and caring for one another. The earliest church in Jerusalem witnessed many Christians selling all they had, giving the proceeds to the Apostles, who then used those resources to provide for the needs of all the Christians (Acts 2:41-47, 4:32-37). Upon hearing of an impending famine to strike Judea, the church in Antioch prepared and sent relief to them (Acts 11:26-30). Paul encouraged Christians in churches in Galatia, Macedonia, and Achaia to give for the needs of Christians in Judea, and they provided abundantly (cf. Romans 15:25-27, 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, 2 Corinthians 8:1-15, 9:1-15). The instructions Paul gave Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:3-16 presume congregational financial support of destitute widows bereft of family. The Christians to whom the Hebrews author wrote were known for their service for other Christians (Hebrews 6:9-12); John encouraged Gaius to provide for the needs of visiting Christians, and fully expected his compliance (3 John 1:5-8). Paul related how Peter, James, and John insisted that he remember the poor as he went about doing good and proclaiming the Word, and Paul proved eager to do so (Galatians 2:9-10). Paul exhorted Christians to do good to all men, especially those of the household of faith (Galatians 6:10); James identified pure and undefiled religion as visiting widows and orphans in their distress as well as keeping oneself unstained from the world (James 1:27).

Abundant testimony exists, therefore, regarding the liberality of early Christians, and Christians to this day do well to imitate their example. Christians must recognize how all they have comes from God; they are called to be stewards and to use that with which God has blessed them to bless and serve others (e.g. Ephesians 4:29). God stands willing to abundantly bless those who use what He gave them to benefit others, following the model of Christ Himself (2 Corinthians 8:9-15, 9:6-11). John questioned the sincerity of the love of any Christian who has the world’s goods but does not give to his brother who is in need, and would consider such a one as a murderer who hates his brother (1 John 3:11-18)! A Christian who gives liberally manifests the fruit of the Spirit and thus embodies an important characteristic of Christ (Galatians 5:22-24).

Christians do well to prove very liberal in providing for the needs of their fellow Christians. Most examples of giving in the New Testament involve Christians providing for the needs of their own; Jesus’ standard of judgment in Matthew 25:31-46 is based on how well or poorly each had provided for “the least of these my brothers”. When Paul exhorted Christians to do good to all men he made sure to emphasize the need to provide for those in the “household of faith.” Christians must take care of their own; such, in part, is how the world will know we are of Christ, by such a manifestation of love for each other (John 13:35). While the local congregation also should be involved in providing for the needs of Christians locally and abroad (Acts 2:41-47, 4:32-37, 11:27-30, 1 Timothy 5:3-16), each individual Christian should determine to provide for fellow Christians as they have opportunity on their own. There is never a lack of opportunity to give; we can find Christians locally and abroad who could use assistance; in this way we can build up the body of Christ (Ephesians 4:11-16)!

We do well to recognize how the New Testament provides no authority for a local congregation, as a collective, to provide benevolence to those outside of the faith. It has proven necessary to preach and teach on these matters strongly on account of the pervasive influence of the industrial-level drive toward efficiency and specialization in the world and as seen in other parts of “Christendom.” Far too many prove far too willing to give money to the church or some other organization and consider their responsibility to give to others satisfied. The New Testament provides no such provision or hope!

We therefore rightly insist that individual Christians are given the responsibility to do good to all men (Galatians 6:10). If we insist on this, we must also practice it. It proves all too tempting, when hearing preaching condemning collective work in benevolence, to reject all benevolence or excuse a lack of benevolence. The New Testament provides no such provision; we must actually be the light of the world by doing good and proving liberal in giving, as we have opportunity, to those who are in need in the world!

Therefore the Christian’s liberality must extend well beyond giving to the local congregation on the first day of the week (1 Corinthians 16:1-4). Let none be deceived: Christians do well and ought to give for the benefit of the work of the collective congregation on the first day of the week. Yet the responsibility of the individual Christian in giving goes beyond the local congregation: will God be satisfied if you have nothing to give people in need because you gave it all to the church (cf. Matthew 15:1-7)? The Christian must give both to the work of the local church while still proving liberal in assisting others they encounter in life.

Liberality extends beyond financial resources; we must never reduce “doing good” to cutting checks or swiping cards. God in Christ expects Christians to prove liberal not only in financial resources but also in giving time, energy, and attention. Jesus did not commend the faithful Christians for merely giving money; He commended them for feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, and visiting those in prison, among other practices (Matthew 25:34-40). Did James say that pure and undefiled religion before God is merely to give money to widows and orphans in James 1:27? By no means! He insisted on Christians visiting widows and orphans, which would include financial benefits when needed, but emphasized presence and involvement in life. As humans we have so much more to give to others than money; by devoting time, energy, and other resources into people, we maintain a human connection with them, as Jesus did with those with whom He interacted.

It is unfortunate how “liberal” and “liberalism” have become “dirty words” in Christianity, for each and every Christian is called to prove liberal in doing good to all men, especially to those of the household of faith. May we be found liberal in giving before God in Christ, and obtain the resurrection of life!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Christian and Liberality appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Christian and Race

Few subjects prove as fraught with difficulty, pain, suffering, and awkwardness as race, especially race in the United States of America. Some people wish to deny the existence of race and/or racism; others conceive of their fellow man primarily and almost entirely in terms of race. Most people fall somewhere between the two extremes on the spectrum and attempt to sort out the matter of race relations in America.

Race is a social construct. Humans have found all sorts of ways to differentiate among various groupings of people, but have not always done so on the basis of the distinguishing characteristics normally subsumed under the idea of “races.” The idea of “races” as currently conceived is a product of the past few hundred years, often in the service of justifying European imperialism and slavery. These theories of race pervaded all Western thinking by the 19th century; it was taken for granted as “common sense” to white people that they were biologically racially superior to other people, a premise agreed upon by most religious and secular people alike. Only within the past 50 years have such theories regarding race been demonstrated as false through scientific inquiry; while there may be some genetic markers that are consistent among members of a given “race” and not seen in members of other “races,” one could say the same thing about ethnicities or other ways in which people might categorize each other. Therefore, race as conceived of in Western civilization is not biologically mandated or driven; it continues to exist according to social conventions.

We cannot find race as a form of biological or even social categorization in the Scriptures; where certain translations might use “race,” “birth” or “nation” would be more appropriate. Unfortunately Christians in past generations sought to justify their racial ideology with Scripture, appealing to “each according to its own kind” in Genesis 1:25, the mark of Cain in Genesis 4:15, and/or the curse of Ham and Canaan in Genesis 9:25. Such was a shameful distortion of the teachings of Scripture; other passages strongly insist on the singular origin of all humanity (e.g. Acts 17:26). In Acts 17:26 Paul indicated how distinctions among people are most frequently seen in Scripture: from one man God made every nation (Greek ethnos) to dwell in their distinct boundaries at distinct times. We derive the English term “ethnic” from ethnos; ethnos is often translated as “Gentiles” when contrasted with the “Jews.” Thus, in Scripture, we are all from different nations; we are not of different races.

Nevertheless, even if race is not an accurate category according to biology, race remains a culturally constructed reality in America. As Christians we cannot pretend that race does not matter; even if it has no significant biological grounding and even less Biblical merit, race remains a predominant means of categorization in American society and culture. Various forms and means of racial segregation persisted in America for many generations; should we then be surprised when people of the same “race” end up developing their own distinct culture or subculture within America, and maintain a form of racial identity? Numerous studies persistently show how Americans retain racial bias, even if often implicit or subconscious. According to Scripture we have every right to say that all of us are part of the human race (Acts 17:26); we have no right, however, to deny the differences which have arisen among people on account of the persistent categorization by race. Perhaps one day in America race will cease to be a predominant form of categorization in society; on that day we can lay race theory to rest fully; however, that day has not yet come, and Christians ought not to marginalize others because of it.

The New Testament is unambiguous about whether certain groups of people are superior to others: all have sinned, all have fallen short of the glory of God, and in Christ, not only can all find salvation, but all stand equal in the sight of God in Christ (Romans 3:23, Galatians 3:28, Ephesians 2:1-18). Unfortunately, for many years, far too many Christians did not uphold this teaching, and on the basis of their theory of race advanced the cause of white supremacy. To this day certain groups claim white supremacy is consistent with the teaching of God in Christ; nothing could be further from the truth. As there is neither Jew nor Greek in Christ, so assuredly there is neither white nor black in Christ (cf. Galatians 3:28). Christians must acknowledge the violence done to people of color in the name of white supremacy and lament how it was often done “in the name of the Lord.” Christians should take every opportunity given to denounce white supremacy wherever it may raise its head and to powerfully and unequivocally proclaim the Gospel truth of man’s fundamental equality before God.

Race proves particularly fraught for white people in America, for most white people do not really believe themselves to be a distinct race or manifesting a distinct culture. White people in America tend to presume their understanding of America and race is normative; they often have difficulty understanding how their experience is not “normal,” and often could never be “normal,” for people of color. White Christians do well to heed James’ advice and be quick to hear and slow to speak, proving willing to endure discomfort and to have their viewpoint expanded by the perspectives and experiences of people of color (James 1:19). Through such interactions white Christians may learn to see the world with a different set of eyes and recognize how so much they take for granted is a luxury many people of color have not been able to enjoy, and only because of this societal construct. White Christians can then work to advocate for and uphold the integrity of people of color, striving to make good on the Gospel truth of the equality of all people before God.

In Revelation 7:9 we are invited to see a beautiful picture: people from every nation, tribe, and people standing before God’s throne, praising Him. God’s goal for Christians in Christ is not to eliminate every difference or distinction, but to have all hostility among people killed through what Jesus accomplished on the cross (Ephesians 2:11-18). Paul did not cease being Jewish when he was converted (Acts 23:6); those of the nations remain part of those nations, yet maintain a stronger loyalty to the trans-national Kingdom of God in Christ (Philippians 3:20-21). Through the church God declares His manifold wisdom to the powers and principalities (Ephesians 3:10-11): people from every walk of life who remain very different people and yet are one in Christ (John 17:20-23). Christians are at their best not when they deny all differences among people but celebrate each person’s and each group of people’s distinctiveness, recognizing how the body of Christ is not a factory churning out thousands of the same part but made up of different parts all working to build up the whole (1 Corinthians 12:12-28).

Thus race may be a social construct but remains one acutely felt by Americans; as Christians in America, we must denounce racism and embody the Gospel imperative of racial and ethnic inclusivity, all in ways which glorify God in Christ. May we uphold the truth of God in Christ, strive to build up the body of Christ, and invite all to serve the Lord Jesus!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Christian and Race appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Paul’s Letter to Philemon

Onesimus was a runaway slave. It was necessary to make all things right, but that could lead to injury or death. Paul leveraged all the influence in his command to assist Onesimus with his owner Philemon.

Paul’s letter to Philemon is the eighteenth book in modern editions of the New Testament. Paul and Timothy are listed as its authors (Philemon 1:1), but throughout Paul’s voice is manifestly pre-eminent. The presence of Philemon 1:19ff may indicate the rest of the letter was dictated to an amanuensis. Pauline authorship of Philemon is not seriously questioned even among scholars. Paul speaks of himself and Epaphras as “prisoners” of the Lord Jesus (Philemon 1:1, 9, 23); for this reason Philemon is reckoned as one of Paul’s prison letters along with Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians. Paul sent greetings from Epaphras and wrote not only to Philemon but also to Apphia, Archippus, and the church in their house (Philemon 1:1): Paul had a special message for Archippus in Colossians 4:17, said Epaphras was “one of them” in Colossians 4:12, and assured the Colossians that Onesimus would make know to them his affairs in Colossians 4:9. Philemon therefore is most likely a Christian in Colossae, of some means, able to host the church there in his house; perhaps Apphia and Archippus were his relatives (wife and son?), and were at least part of the household. We therefore believe that Paul wrote Philemon at the same time he wrote Colossians, most likely from prison in Caesarea, and delivered both letters by the hand of Onesimus the subject of the letter of Philemon (ca. 59-60; cf. Acts 23:23-26:32). Paul wrote to Philemon on behalf of Onesimus, Philemon’s runaway slave who converted to the Lord Jesus, to show mercy and clemency.

Paul began his letter with a standard epistolary introduction to Philemon, called “beloved” and a “fellow worker,” along with Apphia and Archippus and the church in their house, also suggesting the letter, and the pressure and influence suggested therein, was to be read before the whole congregation (Philemon 1:1-3). According to his custom Paul then gave thanks for Philemon in his prayers, having heard of and been comforted by Philemon’s love for his and encouragement and refreshment of his fellow Christians (Philemon 1:4-7).

Paul then made his plea for Onesimus (Philemon 1:8-22). Paul could have commanded Philemon in this matter, but preferred for the sake of love to exhort him (Philemon 1:8-9). Paul besought Philemon on behalf of Onesimus, considered as a child begotten in prison, previously of lesser value but now of greater value to both Paul and Philemon; Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon in order to make things right but could have continued to benefit from his ministration while in prison, so that Onesimus’ service would be as a freewill offering of Philemon to Paul, and not under compulsion (Philemon 1:10-14). Paul suggested Onesimus’ temporary separation from Philemon was fortuitous, to have him no longer merely a slave but now as a beloved brother in Christ (Philemon 1:15-16). Thus, if Philemon considers Paul a partner (in the faith), Philemon should receive Onesimus back as if he were Paul (Philemon 1:17). If Philemon has been wronged or suffered monetary loss on account of Philemon, he should charge it to Paul’s account; Paul wrote in his own hand how he would repay it and not so subtly reminded Philemon that he owed Paul his own life besides (Philemon 1:18-19). Paul most likely continued in his own hand to implore Philemon to provide him joy and refresh his heart in Christ, yet remained confident that Philemon would not only obey what Paul wrote, but would go beyond what Paul said (Philemon 1:20-21). Paul asked Philemon to prepare a place for him, for he intended to visit Philemon in the near future (Philemon 1:22). Having provided greetings from Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, Paul concluded his letter to Philemon with a standard epistolary conclusion (Philemon 1:23-25).

Paul’s letter to Philemon displays a masterful rhetorical hand addressing a challenging and fraught topic. Philemon has the legal right to do whatever he desires with Onesimus as a runaway slave. Paul appeals to Philemon according to the higher calling of God in Christ Jesus, encouraging him to welcome Onesimus as a brother in Christ, and giving the congregation in Colossae plenty of reasons to encourage Philemon to do the same. By professing confidence in Philemon to do the right thing Paul gave him the benefit of the doubt and provided Philemon every reason in the world to be generous and merciful and receive the commendation of God, Onesimus, and his fellow Christians for doing so.

Paul’s letter to Philemon delicately handled the extremely challenging topic of slavery in Christianity and Greco-Roman society. Paul neither justified the practice of slavery nor did he explicitly agitate for its abolition. Instead Paul addressed this individual slave owner and appealed to him in the name of God, love, his own salvation, and the higher bond of brotherhood in Christ to encourage him to take back his runaway slave and treat him well. Neither Jesus nor the Apostles made it their main purpose to overthrow existing societal structures. Nevertheless, over the subsequent centuries, it proved all the more difficult to maintain the institution of slavery when both master and slave would share equally in the faith and at the communion table of the Lord Jesus (1 Corinthians 11:17-34, Galatians 3:28). By the medieval period serfdom proved more culturally predominant than slavery; throughout the past two millennia efforts toward reduction or abolition of serfdom or slavery have most often been led by those influenced by Jesus and the teachings about equality of all people in the New Testament.

We have no insight as to the conclusion of the matter; Colossae would be struck by a major earthquake in 60-61 and the town would never fully recover. We would like to think that Philemon welcomed Onesimus back warmly; we have no idea whether they survived the earthquake and its aftereffects, although it is highly unlikely that Paul was ever able to visit with Philemon. Nevertheless somehow both Colossians and Philemon were preserved. May we all obey the Lord Jesus, serve one another, and glorify God!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Paul’s Letter to Philemon appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Interpreting the Bible: Basic Hermeneutics (2)

We have spent some time investigating the means by which we may better understand the Bible. We recognize how important it is for us to read the Bible and to diligently study it (cf. 2 Timothy 2:15, 2 Peter 3:18), and we have begun to explore the guidelines by which we may interpret God’s Word in a profitable and consistent manner. Previously we established that the first such guideline of hermeneutics (another term for the interpretation process) is to interpret the text literally unless there is a compelling reason otherwise. We also explored how the Bible uses figurative language and how important it is for us to identify figurative language and to interpret it properly. Let us now continue exploring basic guidelines for interpreting God’s Word.

2. The sum of God’s Word is truth. As the Psalmist says in Psalm 119:160:

The sum of thy word is truth; And every one of thy righteous ordinances endureth for ever.

While it is good for us to investigate God’s Word in depth and analyze passages in great detail, we must never interpret any passage so as to create contradiction within God’s Word. God’s Word represents one harmonious whole consisting of many individual parts. Sadly, too many “miss the forest because of the trees” when interpreting the Scriptures.

A good example of this tendency may be found with the concept of predestination. There have been many who have come upon passages like Ephesians 1:1-13 and come away with the impression that God has pre-determined precisely whom He would save (and, by necessity, precisely whom He would condemn). Nevertheless, in Romans 2:11 we see that there is no partiality with God, and the Scriptures attest in 1 Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9 that God does not desire anyone to perish but that all would come to repentance. Since the sum of God’s Word is truth, we recognize how predestination in Ephesians 1:1-13 does not preclude God from desiring all men to be saved in 1 Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9; God does not pre-determine who is saved or condemned. There is no contradiction here!

We also see this in many discussions regarding baptism. Many people will focus on passages like John 3:16 or Romans 10:9-10 and assert that these passages present the “only” things necessary for salvation. Nevertheless, the Scriptures attest in Matthew 28:18-20, Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-7, and 1 Peter 3:21, among other places, that baptism is also necessary for salvation. Again, the sum of God’s Word is truth: belief and confession per John 3:16 and Romans 10:9-10 are necessary for salvation, but baptism is also necessary for salvation, based on Matthew 28:18-20, Acts 2:38, and 1 Peter 3:21!

It is clear, then, that God does not desire for us to read His Word with “tunnel vision”: we must always keep the whole of His Word in mind when reading the Scriptures.

3. Let the Bible interpret the Bible. Another principle of interpretation that we ought to consider is to allow the Bible to interpret the Bible whenever necessary. Interpretation is all too often a human endeavor, fraught with human error and fallibility. It is all but certain that each and every one of us has made mistakes in interpretation in the past, present, and future. It is always best, therefore, to allow God to interpret His own Word whenever He does so!

Jesus’ parable of the sower, found in Matthew 13:3-9, 18-23, Mark 4:3-9, 13-20, and Luke 8:4-8, 11-15, is a good example of this. Jesus presents the parable in all three accounts, and later on His disciples ask Him to explain it to them, which He does. Since Jesus Himself explains the parable to us, we have no need to wonder what He means! This way there is much less room for error!

4. Consider the Context. It is very difficult to understand what a text means without understanding the context in which the text is written. As it is often said, “a text without a context is a pretext”! Many times statements are ripped out of their context and abused in interpretation to attempt to prove an idea or practice that never entered into the mind of the writer or into the mind of God!

A clear and obvious example of this would be the statement, “Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!”, found in Acts 19:28. If the statement somehow stood alone it would give us reason to pause and to ask whether Artemis of the Ephesians were really great or not. In context, however, the statement’s purpose is clear: it is the rallying cry of the Ephesians, challenging Paul and the message of the Gospel which he promoted in Ephesus. Since it is said by the enemies of Paul, and therefore the enemies of the Gospel, we recognize that Luke is recording a historical event without giving approval to the statement. Artemis of the Ephesians, in truth, is not “great”.

We can take this same principle and apply it to the promises made by Jesus regarding the gift of the Holy Spirit in John 14:16-18, John 15:26, and John 16:7-11. These passages are often cited attempting to demonstrate that all believers will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit in this measure. Nevertheless, in context, we see that Jesus is speaking to His twelve disciples and provides this special promise to them that is specifically fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (cf. Acts 1:4-5, Acts 2:1-12). Context will guide us to proper understanding and interpretation.

We have seen, then, some of the basic guidelines of hermeneutics, or the interpretation process, by which we may properly discern God’s purpose for our lives in His Word, the Scriptures. Let us give consideration to these guidelines and always remember that not a few have gone terribly astray from the Lord’s paths not because of God’s Word itself but how they have decided to interpret what God has said. Let us labor to be approved workmen, without need to be ashamed (2 Timothy 2:15)!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Interpreting the Bible: Basic Hermeneutics (2) appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan on the Christians

God has made Himself known through Jesus of Nazareth, and, as Paul declared to Agrippa, the things which God accomplished through Jesus and His people did not take place in a corner (Acts 26:26; cf. Hebrews 1:1-3). The Apostles relied upon the people’s first-hand knowledge of what God did through Jesus (Acts 2:22, 10:36-43). Thus we do well to explore the various forms of evidence which exist for Jesus and Christianity.

One such piece of evidence does not come from a Christian but a pagan Roman named Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus (popularly known as Pliny the Younger). Pliny was elevated to the role of governor of the province of Bithynia and Pontus (the northeast section of what is today Turkey). His correspondence has been preserved throughout time and has proven of great value to historians. Among his correspondence is a letter which he wrote to the Emperor Trajan regarding Christians in his province, as well as Trajan’s response (ca. 112 CE; Epistulae X, 96-97). These letters represent the earliest documented reaction to Christianity from the pen of a Roman.

These letters can be accessed, in Latin and in English translations, here and here. In Epistulae X.96 Pliny began by establishing the purpose of his letter: he wanted advice from Trajan in regards to how to handle situations in which a person is accused of being a Christian. What should happen if they prove penitent and offer sacrifices to the gods? If they remain impertinent, should they all be punished alike?

Pliny then spoke of recent circumstances: some had been brought before him and accused to be Christians. They confessed they were, and were punished for their obstinacy. Soon afterward all sorts of charges began to be brought against many people. Many of those charged were actually lapsed Christians, and proved willing to worship the image of Trajan and to curse Christ (and Pliny noted that true Christians do not speak curses against Christ).

From these lapsed Christians Pliny said he learned the following:

They affirmed how the sum of their error or guilt was this: they used to convene on a stated day before dawn and sang together a song to Christ as a god and swore with an oath not to commit sin, or fraud, or theft, or adultery, or to break a pledge, or to deny funds placed in trust. Having performed these things it was their habit to leave and then return later to take a meal, mixed together although innocently; which they desisted doing after my decree which forbids societies, which follows your edict (Author’s Translation).

Pliny would not trust their testimony alone; he also found out the truth by torturing two women called ministrae (servants or deaconesses), but only discovered an “intemperate and depraved superstition.” He stopped his investigation to seek counsel from Trajan since a great number of the people in the cities, towns, and countryside had fallen prey to Christianity, and a many more might fall under its spell. Pliny was confident the superstition could be curbed, and spoke glowingly of how once-deserted temples were again filled and the food offered to sacrifices once again had buyers.

Trajan’s reply to Pliny is preserved in Epistulae X.97. Trajan assured Pliny regarding how he conducted himself in terms of Christians: there cannot be one hard and fast rule. Christians must not be searched out, but if accusations are made and confirmed, they must be punished. Anyone who changed their minds and prayed to the pagan gods should be pardoned. Anonymous lists, however, must not be permitted; they represented a bad example, especially in their day.

Pliny’s Epistulae X.96-97 represent powerful testimony regarding many elements of Christian practice in the early second century, and all the more because the sources are not sympathetic to their cause. Perhaps some of the details are confused because of the perspective of the apostates as well as the attempt to make Christianity comprehensible to a pagan ruler; nevertheless, we can see important continuity between many of the things we see in the New Testament period and how things are done in Bithynia and Pontus in 112. Christians are meeting on a specific day (Sunday; cf. Revelation 1:10, Justin Martyr First Apology 67); on that day they sing together songs praising Christ as a god (cf. Ephesians 5:19, Philippians 2:5-11, Colossians 3:16); they would share a common meal independent of their assemblies until it was decreed otherwise, indicating that such meals went beyond the Lord’s Supper, able to be forsaken without difficulty (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:17-34); they also proved willing to obey the decrees of earthly authorities (Romans 13:1-7, 1 Peter 2:11-18). They agreed to avoid sinfulness, evil behavior, and fornication, consistent with Ephesians 4:25-28 and 1 Thessalonians 4:3-6; whether the binding by oath was an innovation contrary to the spirit of Matthew 5:33-37 and James 5:12 or merely an accommodative explanation to Pliny about Christian commitment in exhortation cannot be satisfactorily decided with present evidence. Christians held firm against participation in pagan temple rites and avoided eating meat sacrificed to idols (1 Corinthians 8:1-13, Revelation 2:14); their message spread with sufficient strength so as to alarm Roman officials!

The text does mention two women serving in the role of ministrae, or deaconesses. One might try to suggest that such terminology could refer to their roles as servants of Christ, but the phraseology in the letter strongly suggests that these women did indeed serve as deaconesses in a church in Bithynia or Pontus in 112. The question is whether such is consistent with New Testament practice or was part of the innovations in leadership being introduced into the church at this time; it is worth noting that Ignatius of Antioch is a contemporary of both Pliny the Younger and Trajan, eventually finding martyrdom at the hands of the latter, and Ignatius is one of the most influential agitators toward having one bishop preside over the elders and a local church, contrary to what is seen in Acts 14:23, Philippians 1:1, and 1 Peter 5:1-4.

In the early second century Christianity was well established in many parts of the Roman world and had attracted sufficient numbers of adherents to cause distress to local pagan religion and local governors. We can say such things with confidence on account of the witness of Pliny the Younger in his correspondence with the Emperor Trajan. May we hold firm to the faith of God in Christ and be saved!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Works Consulted

“Pliny the Younger,” Early Christian Writings (accessed 25/07/2017)

“Pliny’s Letter to Emperor Trajan,” (accessed 25/07/2017).

The post Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan on the Christians appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Christian and the Body

Western culture and society, and all those influenced by them, have a love-hate relationship with the body.

By all accounts and appearances Western culture loves the physical body and its desires. Everywhere we look it seems we find an alluring figure selling us everything from chewing gum to automobiles. People give full expression to the desires of the body in terms of consumption of food, drink, and drugs as well as sex. Billions of dollars are spent for makeup, surgeries, gym memberships, and health products in the drive to obtain the perfect body.

The drive for the “perfect body” manifests a strong hatred in Western culture for bodies as they are in reality. Many people deemed “beautiful” by society wear so much makeup that you would not recognize them without it. The images we see in advertisements are “Photoshopped”; even the people whose bodies are ostensibly on display do not really look that “good”! All of us, men and women alike, judge our bodies according to these impossible standards, and therefore all of our bodies fail miserably to reach the standard. We incessantly focus on our “flaws” and “imperfections”; precious few have a positive view of their body. Furthermore, no matter how well or poorly we treat our bodies, as we age, the body begins to decay and fail at many of its functions; we are not able to function the way we did before; we feel as if our bodies are letting us down. Western culture and society upholds ideal bodies; any body not near the ideal, on account of appearance, size, age, or disability, is disparaged, dishonored, and marginalized. “We” don’t want to see such things!

All Christians who live in Western culture or society are subject to this love-hate relationship with the body; this is proving increasingly true for Christians in other cultures and societies as well on account of the strong influence of Western media. How, then, should Christians navigate these cultural trends? How should Christians view and treat the body?

Christians do well to understand how both paganism and Greek philosophy, especially from Plato, lay underneath Western cultural assumptions and beliefs about the body, and they ought to reject both of them. The influence of Greek philosophy proves pernicious, even among those who profess to follow the Lord Jesus; it is manifest in quotes as the following: “You do not have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.” This quote is often attributed to C.S. Lewis, but more likely comes from George MacDonald. It seems spiritual and thus well and good but it is really Gnosticism, a Christian form of Greek philosophy, repudiated by Scripture. Embodiment is essential for the human experience; we are not humans with bodies, but humans because we have bodies. The breath of life with which God inspired Adam was not human; when the breath of life was breathed into the body which God had made, Adam became human (Genesis 2:7). The Word of God was not human before He took on flesh and dwelt among us as Jesus of Nazareth; at that point He became human, the Son of Man, and in His resurrection maintains a transformed body and thus remains human (John 1:1, 14, Acts 7:55-56, Philippians 3:20-21, 1 Timothy 2:5). For good reason David praised YHWH for how wonderfully and fearfully he was made; and what did God make but his body (Psalm 139:13-16)?

Therefore God has made us as human beings with bodies; not only did He make humans as a category, but His hand was involved in the shaping of us as individuals. Yes, because of sin and death our bodies have been corrupted, and we likely all suffer from physical challenges, disabilities, and “imperfections” (cf. Romans 5:12-20, 8:19-24). And yet each of us can glorify God in our bodies (1 Corinthians 6:20). We can appreciate our differences without judgment or condemnation, recognizing that all have different abilities that can be used to serve one another (1 Corinthians 12:12-28, 1 Peter 4:10-11). We do not need to fear or hate our bodies because they do not reflect some impossible or unsustainable standard; yes, our bodies not only manifest imperfections but will decay and die, but our hope remains in the resurrection and transformation of these lowly physical bodies for eternity in Jesus, the redemption of the body (Romans 8:23-25, 1 Corinthians 15:20-58, Philippians 3:20-21). God did not give us bodies to oppress us or to cause us constant distress and grief; instead, being in the body is an essential aspect of being human, and Christians do well to reflect good stewardship of the bodies which God has given them (1 Timothy 4:8).

Nevertheless for good reason did Paul speak of sin in humans in terms of the flesh: so much of our difficulties with sin revolve around the satisfaction of bodily desires (Galatians 5:17-24; cf. 1 John 2:15-17). Too many in Western culture reflect the decadence consistent with paganism: eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die (1 Corinthians 15:32; cf. Romans 1:18-32). Excessive living is “in”: excessive exercise, excessive eating, excessive consumption of drugs or alcohol, and/or excessive expressions of sexuality fueled by pornography. God’s will for the Christian is sanctification, manifest according to 1 Thessalonians 4:3-7 by abstaining from sexually deviant behavior and possessing his or her “vessel,” or body, in sanctification and honor, and not in the passions of lust. Therefore Christians must maintain self-control and self-discipline in all things: avoiding all sexually deviant behavior, indeed, but also manifesting healthy and moderate behavior in terms of food, drink, and exercise.

In a culture of excess God calls the Christian to moderation and sobriety. The Christian ought not be excessively devoted to the body; neither should the Christian hate the body, ignore it, or act as if it is unnecessary. Christians do well to recognize that to be human is to be in the body, and we do well to act as good stewards of the bodies God has given us, establishing healthy disciplines in terms of food, drink, and exercise. But Christians also know the body will decay and die no matter how well they take care of their bodies, and their hope and trust must be in God in Christ for the resurrection when we will no longer experience suffering, pain, or decay, but enjoy eternity in transformed bodies. May we live so as to obtain the resurrection of life and be saved!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Christian and the Body appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

Paul’s Letter to Titus

Paul maintained great confidence in Titus; he had given the younger evangelist quite the tall order. Cretans were notorious for lying and gluttony; Titus would do well to set all things in order and exhort them unto righteousness. To this end Paul wrote to Titus.

Paul’s letter to Titus is the seventeenth book in modern editions of the New Testament; along with 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus is considered one of the “pastoral letters,” featuring counsel for preachers in how to work among the people of God. Paul is listed as its author (Titus 1:1); it would seem as if he wrote the letter personally. Pauline authorship of Titus is strongly contested by scholars on the basis of style and content. Nevertheless Christians of the late second century believed it to be genuine, and differences in style and content can be easily explained in terms of Paul’s later age and different audience. The letter is undated. Paul exhorted Titus to meet him in Nicopolis for the winter (Titus 3:12), which could be in Epirus, Thrace, or Cilicia; regardless, we have no evidence from the book of Acts of Paul spending the winter in any of these areas, and thus it is believed that Titus was written after Paul’s first Roman imprisonment but before the second (ca. 61-64 CE). Paul wrote to Titus to give direction regarding appointing elders and exhorting the Cretans to righteousness.

In his epistolary greeting Paul spoke of himself as a servant of God who cannot lie and who promised eternal life through the message of His Son Jesus of whom Paul was an apostle charged to proclaim His commandments for the faith of the elect according to the knowledge of truth (Titus 1:1-4). Paul then explained the reason why he left Titus in Crete: to set in order that which was wanting and to appoint elders in every city; Paul then again set forth qualifications for the overseers, concluding with their ability to teach the healthy doctrines; in Crete many Jewish people, perhaps even Christians, were unruly, deceptive, and overthrowing houses by teaching doctrines they ought not for the sake of riches (Titus 1:5-11). Paul then characterized Cretans according to the testimony of Epimenides of Crete, considering them as liars, beasts, and gluttons; on account of this Titus must reprove them so they may be healthy in faith, no longer following Jewish myths and traditions (Titus 1:12-14; cf. Epimenides of Crete’s Cretica). Paul reminded Titus how all is pure to the pure, but to the defiled nothing is pure (Titus 1:15).

Paul encouraged Titus to teach healthy doctrines (Titus 2:1), providing specific exhortations for Christians in various circumstances: older men (Titus 2:2), older women (who themselves were to teach younger women; Titus 2:3-5), and younger men (Titus 2:6). Titus himself was to display in himself an example of good works and faithful teaching so as to cause shame on any who would speak in opposition (Titus 2:7-8). Paul provided further exhortation to Christian slaves to remain faithful to God and subject to their masters (Titus 2:9-10). God’s grace appeared, bringing salvation to everyone, instructing those who would hear to deny ungodliness and lust and live soberly, righteously, and godly while awaiting the return of God our Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for His people: such grounded Paul’s exhortations to Christians, and Titus was to proclaim them with all authority, allowing none to despise him (Titus 2:11-15).

Titus should also remind Christian to remain in subjection to rulers and authorities, obedient, ready to do good works, speaking evil of none, not contentious but gentle, meek to all (Titus 3:1-2). Christians are to live this way because they also were once disobedient, deceived, living in malice and envy, hated and hating in turn, but had received salvation through the kindness and love of God manifest through Jesus; this salvation is not based in works Christians did in righteousness but through God’s mercy in baptism and the Holy Spirit so that Christians could be justified by grace and inherit eternal life (Titus 3:3-7). Paul affirmed these things so that Titus could affirm them as well so that believers in Christ would maintain good works which prove profitable; nevertheless, contentions, strife, foolish questions, and speculations about the Law are vain and unprofitable (Titus 3:8-9). Anyone proving to be factious should be warned twice and then rejected or refused, since such a one proves self-condemned in their sins (Titus 3:10-11).

Paul concluded with specific directions for Titus: Paul would send Artemas or Tychichus to take his place, and he was to meet Paul in Nicopolis where he planned on wintering; Titus was to provide for whatever Zenas the lawyer and Apollos might need on their journey (Titus 3:12-13). Cretan Christians were to maintain good works and not be unfruitful (Titus 3:14). Having given final greetings, Paul ended his letter with a standard epistolary conclusion (Titus 3:5).

Paul’s letter to Titus provides Christians with a glimpse of the kind of instruction and exhortation the Apostles provided to those commissioned to continue to teach the Gospel of Christ after them. To this day many continue to teach things they ought not for monetary gain and obsess over speculative issues and myths; to this day those who proclaim the Gospel must insist on the healthy teachings about Jesus. Christians continue to need exhortation to remember from whence they have come and on what basis God has saved them so they may be fruitful with good works; Christians continue to need reminders about how to interact with one another, to avoid the lusts of the world, and to live righteously and soberly as they await the return of the Lord Jesus. To this day churches require things to be set in order and to maintain Scriptural leadership and organization with elders in local congregations. With a few detail changes an older preacher could write almost the same letter to a younger preacher today! We do well to take heed and uphold the healthy doctrines of God in Christ, encourage each other unto good works in Jesus, and await the return of the Lord Jesus!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post Paul’s Letter to Titus appeared first on de Verbo vitae.

The Sinner’s Prayer

If you have much experience at all with evangelical Christianity, you have heard of or perhaps have even prayed the sinner’s prayer. The sinner’s prayer is purported to be a prayer to pray when a person comes to faith in Jesus for the first time or wishes to rededicate themselves to faith in Jesus as a response to God in Christ done by faith. While there is no one set edition of the sinner’s prayer, the version Billy Graham encouraged people to pray proves representative of the genre:

Dear Lord Jesus, I know that I am a sinner, and I ask for Your forgiveness. I believe You died for my sins and rose from the dead. I turn from my sins and invite You to come into my heart and life. I want to trust and follow You as my Lord and Savior. In Your Name, Amen.

You may be astonished to learn that no one in the New Testament prayed the sinner’s prayer; no Apostle exhorted people to pray such a prayer; the sinner’s prayer has no basis or ground in Scripture! There may be seventeenth century antecedents for the sinner’s prayer, and some editions may have been in use in the nineteenth century, but the prevalence of the sinner’s prayer has only been established in the past century. If one needs to pray the sinner’s prayer to demonstrate how they have been saved in Jesus, what will become of all of those who lived for 1900 years before the prayer became popular?

Most of its advocates admit that the sinner’s prayer, as such, is not found in the pages of Scripture. They often appeal to Romans 10:9-10 and Revelation 3:20 to justify the practice, suggesting the sinner’s prayer is the means by which one would confess with the mouth unto salvation and to open the door to the heart to allow Jesus to enter. Unfortunately, this reasoning seems to wish to justify an existing practice more than to make sense of what Paul and Jesus were addressing. The confession of which Paul spoke in Romans 10:9-10 is not of sin, which, while true, is not said to lead to salvation in the New Testament; instead, Paul referred to the confession of Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the Living God, a profession of that which one has now come to believe through the Gospel (cf. Matthew 16:16, 1 Timothy 6:12-13). Jesus did declare to the Laodiceans that He stood at the door and knock in Revelation 3:20, but no specific reference is made to the heart; instead, the metaphor is that of sharing a meal at a table, a demonstration of association. In context Jesus wanted to give the Laodiceans assurance: if they repented, Jesus would again dwell in their midst, and would consider them as part of His people. Jesus certainly continues to invite people to come and abide with and in Him, but the sinner’s prayer is nowhere considered the means by which this would transpire.

Furthermore, to what end does the sinner’s prayer exist? After all, those who tend to advocate for the sinner’s prayer also advocate for salvation by faith alone. Many will in fact stress how the sinner’s prayer itself does not provide salvation but is designed to be a response a person can make in order to have some kind of moment they can point to as the moment at which they became saved. When the sinner’s prayer is offered at type of “altar call” it also becomes a public demonstration of one’s faith. Thus the sinner’s prayer seems to exist because it provides a type of experience which demonstrates the change inherent in the point of conversion.

James the Lord’s brother warned us against the idea that anyone is justified by faith alone (James 2:24); nevertheless, Christians are saved by grace through faith, since none of us can earn salvation by any works we might do for merit (Romans 3:20, Ephesians 2:1-8). As Revelation 3:20 would suggest, Jesus stands at the door and knocks: He has done all that is necessary for us to be saved if we would only accept His salvation according to what He has set forth for us.

How did people respond to the Gospel message in the first century? We find a consistent pattern throughout the pages of Scripture. When people open to the Gospel message heard the declaration of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and imminent return, they recognized Jesus as Lord and Christ by first believing in Him, trusting Him as Lord, then confessing that He was the Christ, the Son of the Living God and repenting of sin and committing to follow Jesus as Lord, and then were baptized in the name of Christ for the forgiveness of their sins (Acts 2:38, 8:35-38, 16:31-33, etc.).

It is good to see that those who would advocate for faith only nevertheless recognize that there ought to be some action or means by which one’s conversion is memorialized, both for the believer him or herself and for others as well. And yet God anticipated such needs already and has established prescribed actions and behaviors in His Word to this end: confession and baptism. These represent ancient practices which have been maintained consistently for as long as Christianity has existed. On what basis should we prefer a twentieth century innovation over what was proclaimed by the Apostles in the name of Jesus?

The sinner’s prayer cannot provide salvation; it cannot attest to salvation; it has no standing or even purpose according to what God has made known in Christ through the Scriptures. Instead, the only “prayer” of the sinner is to believe in Jesus, confess Jesus before others, repent, and to be immersed in water in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit for the remission of his or her sin (Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-7, 10:9-10). The prayer, or appeal, of the sinner is accomplished in the act of baptism, defined as an appeal to God for a cleansed conscience through the resurrection of Jesus, and for salvation in 1 Peter 3:21. May all seek to be saved in Christ by the means which He established from the beginning, believe, confess, repent, and be baptized, and thus put on Christ!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The post The Sinner’s Prayer appeared first on de Verbo vitae.