Randy Green's Blog - Posts Tagged "practice"
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 1
Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called [Ephesians 4:1].
When we watch sports we tend to express ourselves practically. For example, the wide receiver drops an easy pass in the end zone. It should be six points instead of the goose egg.
I’ve yet to hear a fan express his exacerbation with references to the wind velocity, or to geometry and theoretical calculus. The philosophy of football never gets mentioned either! Fans simply blurt out, “Catch the ball, you louse! Why do you think they pay you millions of dollars?” See. Their expression is practical, not theoretical. It is concrete, not abstract.
Inside the college classroom, contrariwise, no student would get by on such utterances. I mean, can you imagine the philosophy professor’s final exam question, which requiring essay input from his students to define Sartre’s existential atheism? One student writes, “It stinks!”
Think the student passed the class? Think again! Practicality has its place, like at the ball park. But practicality won’t fly in the philosophy classroom. Theory and abstraction rule inside those walls of academia. But theory and abstraction don’t grow well in the arid soil of football fans.
The Apostle Paul’s New Testament letters differ significantly in form, compared with the letters of other New Testament writers. Paul wrote using a “Gentile style”, while the others wrote using a “Hebrew style”. The Gentiles, more specifically the Greeks, were theoretical and philosophical. The Hebrews were more practical in their approach.
The letter to the Ephesian Christians affords an excellent example to illustrate the “Gentile style”, if I may be permitted to refer to the distinction by this phraseology. The Greeks enjoyed soaring to theoretical heights in outer space. Indeed, they never missed an opportunity to hear the latest ideas making the breakfast club circuit.
The Hebrews preferred to express themselves in practical expressions of day-to-day living, like, “Catch the ball, you pansy!” Considering the Hebrews provided the world with spiritual leadership rather than sports, this translated into, “Stop sinning!” or, “Pay your tithes!”
Because of the two different approaches—practical vs. theoretical—some folks over the centuries have drawn the conclusion that James and Paul contradicted each other. Paul insisted that Christians are saved by grace through faith apart from works of the Law. James insisted that faith without works is dead. Hmm. Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Mutually exclusive?
In theological terms (i.e., abstract theory) yes, grace and works are mutually exclusive. But once we put the shoe leather to theological doctrine, no, emphatically no!
We will pause here and continue the subject in our next study. In the interim let’s spend time alone with the Lord.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
When we watch sports we tend to express ourselves practically. For example, the wide receiver drops an easy pass in the end zone. It should be six points instead of the goose egg.
I’ve yet to hear a fan express his exacerbation with references to the wind velocity, or to geometry and theoretical calculus. The philosophy of football never gets mentioned either! Fans simply blurt out, “Catch the ball, you louse! Why do you think they pay you millions of dollars?” See. Their expression is practical, not theoretical. It is concrete, not abstract.
Inside the college classroom, contrariwise, no student would get by on such utterances. I mean, can you imagine the philosophy professor’s final exam question, which requiring essay input from his students to define Sartre’s existential atheism? One student writes, “It stinks!”
Think the student passed the class? Think again! Practicality has its place, like at the ball park. But practicality won’t fly in the philosophy classroom. Theory and abstraction rule inside those walls of academia. But theory and abstraction don’t grow well in the arid soil of football fans.
The Apostle Paul’s New Testament letters differ significantly in form, compared with the letters of other New Testament writers. Paul wrote using a “Gentile style”, while the others wrote using a “Hebrew style”. The Gentiles, more specifically the Greeks, were theoretical and philosophical. The Hebrews were more practical in their approach.
The letter to the Ephesian Christians affords an excellent example to illustrate the “Gentile style”, if I may be permitted to refer to the distinction by this phraseology. The Greeks enjoyed soaring to theoretical heights in outer space. Indeed, they never missed an opportunity to hear the latest ideas making the breakfast club circuit.
The Hebrews preferred to express themselves in practical expressions of day-to-day living, like, “Catch the ball, you pansy!” Considering the Hebrews provided the world with spiritual leadership rather than sports, this translated into, “Stop sinning!” or, “Pay your tithes!”
Because of the two different approaches—practical vs. theoretical—some folks over the centuries have drawn the conclusion that James and Paul contradicted each other. Paul insisted that Christians are saved by grace through faith apart from works of the Law. James insisted that faith without works is dead. Hmm. Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Mutually exclusive?
In theological terms (i.e., abstract theory) yes, grace and works are mutually exclusive. But once we put the shoe leather to theological doctrine, no, emphatically no!
We will pause here and continue the subject in our next study. In the interim let’s spend time alone with the Lord.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 2
Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called [Ephesians 4:1].
Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Are the two mutually exclusive? Let’s continue this analysis now.
Theologically, grace is a free gift, while works demands a paycheck earned. The two are mutually exclusive theologically.
Now consider the matter in practical terms of day-to-day living. If I plant some corn in the ground, what can I expect to happen? Would you believe a corn stalk should grow out of the ground and ears of corn then grow on the corn stalk? If nothing grows, what can we conclude? We conclude that the corn seed is dead. It is sterile.
It is simple practical reasoning, is it not? James—as well as the Hebrews in general—took such an approach. Should someone claim to know the Lord Jesus and be born again, yet they lived like the pagans, James challenged them, “Faith without works is dead.” And you know, he was right on. The fellow who made claims to salvation was all talk and no walk. He begged the question of his salvation.
Paul had a different approach, a Gentile approach, as I phrased it earlier. Paul noted how life comes from God. The corn can only grow if God gives it life. Man can only cooperate with God, as he attempts to live in God’s world. When God blesses man, it is His grace at work, not His obligation to pay man for his works.
In the case of the corn, God wasn’t obligated to make the corn grow. Man planted it, so did God owed him a living? Not so. Fact of the matter is, when the corn did grow, man owed God his gratitude for God’s gift to Him. Every good and perfect gift is from God. It’s not so practical, is it? No, it’s not. It is theoretical, abstract, theological.
Given this hypothetical example of the corn and James’ analysis as contrasted with Paul’s, we note how the two apostles talked apples and oranges. They didn’t speak on the same subject. It only appears like it.
James talked about how to live as a Christian, while Paul talked about how to become a Christian. Paul said, “Saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.” James said, “Faith without works is dead.”
The two apostles weren’t arguing with each other. James talked Hebrew practicality: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… Paul talked Gentile abstraction: God’s unfathomable love, His mysterious dealings with man, and life as it exists in eternity.
Even after expounding on this distinction, however, we still miss out on the fullness of Paul’s letters. We began this study by quoting Ephesians 4:1. The verse is significant to our purposes in this study, in that it cuts Paul’s letter in half. I don’t mean in terms of size alone, with the first half comprising 50% and the second half the other 50%.
Oops! Out of time again. Not to worry. A little time with the Lord Jesus now, and tomorrow we will finish this topic. See you then!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Are the two mutually exclusive? Let’s continue this analysis now.
Theologically, grace is a free gift, while works demands a paycheck earned. The two are mutually exclusive theologically.
Now consider the matter in practical terms of day-to-day living. If I plant some corn in the ground, what can I expect to happen? Would you believe a corn stalk should grow out of the ground and ears of corn then grow on the corn stalk? If nothing grows, what can we conclude? We conclude that the corn seed is dead. It is sterile.
It is simple practical reasoning, is it not? James—as well as the Hebrews in general—took such an approach. Should someone claim to know the Lord Jesus and be born again, yet they lived like the pagans, James challenged them, “Faith without works is dead.” And you know, he was right on. The fellow who made claims to salvation was all talk and no walk. He begged the question of his salvation.
Paul had a different approach, a Gentile approach, as I phrased it earlier. Paul noted how life comes from God. The corn can only grow if God gives it life. Man can only cooperate with God, as he attempts to live in God’s world. When God blesses man, it is His grace at work, not His obligation to pay man for his works.
In the case of the corn, God wasn’t obligated to make the corn grow. Man planted it, so did God owed him a living? Not so. Fact of the matter is, when the corn did grow, man owed God his gratitude for God’s gift to Him. Every good and perfect gift is from God. It’s not so practical, is it? No, it’s not. It is theoretical, abstract, theological.
Given this hypothetical example of the corn and James’ analysis as contrasted with Paul’s, we note how the two apostles talked apples and oranges. They didn’t speak on the same subject. It only appears like it.
James talked about how to live as a Christian, while Paul talked about how to become a Christian. Paul said, “Saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.” James said, “Faith without works is dead.”
The two apostles weren’t arguing with each other. James talked Hebrew practicality: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… Paul talked Gentile abstraction: God’s unfathomable love, His mysterious dealings with man, and life as it exists in eternity.
Even after expounding on this distinction, however, we still miss out on the fullness of Paul’s letters. We began this study by quoting Ephesians 4:1. The verse is significant to our purposes in this study, in that it cuts Paul’s letter in half. I don’t mean in terms of size alone, with the first half comprising 50% and the second half the other 50%.
Oops! Out of time again. Not to worry. A little time with the Lord Jesus now, and tomorrow we will finish this topic. See you then!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 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 [Ephesians 4:1].
The first half of Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Christians follows the Gentile approach. The second half moves out of the classroom and off to the ball park, presenting the Hebrew approach. In the first half Paul taught abstractions like “grace”, “faith”, “salvation”, “covenant”—abstractions in that the concepts are really from eternity and not from time and space. The Book of Hebrews sheds light on this issue.
But then suddenly at chapter 4 and verse 1, Paul came back down to earth and put wear and tear on his sandals. Paul’s message in the second half (chapters 4-6) goes something like this:
You guys are Christians. You didn’t use to be Christians, but now you are. We Jews were the people of God and you weren’t. Now some of us are Christians and some of you Gentiles are too. We’re in the same boat, you see. It’s called the Church, the Body of Christ. I explained all about this in chapters 1-3, remember?
Now that we understand who we are, let me tell you how it translates into daily living. Because we are children of God, this is how we are to live…
Paul then wrote chapters 4-6 to teach various specifics of practical Christianity, Christian living while on this earth.
In terms of James and the practical Hebrew approach, chapters 4-6 are right up the same alley. In terms of the theoretical Gentile approach, chapters 1-3 hit the nail on the head. Paul, you see, employed both approaches in his letter to the Ephesian Christians. Yea, he followed this form in pretty much all his letters.
Notice the phrase in the quoted text which began this study: “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called.” Two concepts are involved in those words,
1. the calling with which you have been called
2. walk in a manner worthy
Ephesians 1-3 are all about Point #1. Ephesians 4-6 are about Point #2. Having expatiated on the Christian’s calling from God—a call to come out of the darkness and into the kingdom of light—Paul proceeded to explain how this calling looked in shoe leather.
We would do well to grow in our knowledge of the Lord Jesus and in our understanding of salvation. But if we keep it in our heads, we will rightly receive James’ rebuke: faith without works is dead. James employed the word “faith” to depict intellectual knowledge, as contrasted with truth which enters the head and transforms the heart into a new creation.
Do we enjoy being rebuked? We needn’t find out. Let’s learn Ephesians 1-3, and then let us put it into practice as per Ephesians 4-6. Works for me. How about for you?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
The first half of Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Christians follows the Gentile approach. The second half moves out of the classroom and off to the ball park, presenting the Hebrew approach. In the first half Paul taught abstractions like “grace”, “faith”, “salvation”, “covenant”—abstractions in that the concepts are really from eternity and not from time and space. The Book of Hebrews sheds light on this issue.
But then suddenly at chapter 4 and verse 1, Paul came back down to earth and put wear and tear on his sandals. Paul’s message in the second half (chapters 4-6) goes something like this:
You guys are Christians. You didn’t use to be Christians, but now you are. We Jews were the people of God and you weren’t. Now some of us are Christians and some of you Gentiles are too. We’re in the same boat, you see. It’s called the Church, the Body of Christ. I explained all about this in chapters 1-3, remember?
Now that we understand who we are, let me tell you how it translates into daily living. Because we are children of God, this is how we are to live…
Paul then wrote chapters 4-6 to teach various specifics of practical Christianity, Christian living while on this earth.
In terms of James and the practical Hebrew approach, chapters 4-6 are right up the same alley. In terms of the theoretical Gentile approach, chapters 1-3 hit the nail on the head. Paul, you see, employed both approaches in his letter to the Ephesian Christians. Yea, he followed this form in pretty much all his letters.
Notice the phrase in the quoted text which began this study: “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called.” Two concepts are involved in those words,
1. the calling with which you have been called
2. walk in a manner worthy
Ephesians 1-3 are all about Point #1. Ephesians 4-6 are about Point #2. Having expatiated on the Christian’s calling from God—a call to come out of the darkness and into the kingdom of light—Paul proceeded to explain how this calling looked in shoe leather.
We would do well to grow in our knowledge of the Lord Jesus and in our understanding of salvation. But if we keep it in our heads, we will rightly receive James’ rebuke: faith without works is dead. James employed the word “faith” to depict intellectual knowledge, as contrasted with truth which enters the head and transforms the heart into a new creation.
Do we enjoy being rebuked? We needn’t find out. Let’s learn Ephesians 1-3, and then let us put it into practice as per Ephesians 4-6. Works for me. How about for you?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 1
Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called [Ephesians 4:1].
When we watch sports we tend to express ourselves practically. For example, the wide receiver drops an easy pass in the end zone. It should be six points instead of the goose egg.
I’ve yet to hear a fan express his exacerbation with references to the wind velocity, or to geometry and theoretical calculus. The philosophy of football never gets mentioned either! Fans simply blurt out, “Catch the ball, you louse! Why do you think they pay you millions of dollars?” See. Their expression is practical, not theoretical. It is concrete, not abstract.
Inside the college classroom, contrariwise, no student would get by on such utterances. I mean, can you imagine the philosophy professor’s final exam question, which requiring essay input from his students to define Sartre’s existential atheism? One student writes, “It stinks!”
Think the student passed the class? Think again! Practicality has its place, like at the ball park. But practicality won’t fly in the philosophy classroom. Theory and abstraction rule inside those walls of academia. But theory and abstraction don’t grow well in the arid soil of football fans.
The Apostle Paul’s New Testament letters differ significantly in form, compared with the letters of other New Testament writers. Paul wrote using a “Gentile style”, while the others wrote using a “Hebrew style”. The Gentiles, more specifically the Greeks, were theoretical and philosophical. The Hebrews were more practical in their approach.
The letter to the Ephesian Christians affords an excellent example to illustrate the “Gentile style”, if I may be permitted to refer to the distinction by this phraseology. The Greeks enjoyed soaring to theoretical heights in outer space. Indeed, they never missed an opportunity to hear the latest ideas making the breakfast club circuit.
The Hebrews preferred to express themselves in practical expressions of day-to-day living, like, “Catch the ball, you pansy!” Considering the Hebrews provided the world with spiritual leadership rather than sports, this translated into, “Stop sinning!” or, “Pay your tithes!”
Because of the two different approaches—practical vs. theoretical—some folks over the centuries have drawn the conclusion that James and Paul contradicted each other. Paul insisted that Christians are saved by grace through faith apart from works of the Law. James insisted that faith without works is dead. Hmm. Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Mutually exclusive?
In theological terms (i.e., abstract theory) yes, grace and works are mutually exclusive. But once we put the shoe leather to theological doctrine, no, emphatically no!
We will pause here and continue the subject in our next study. In the interim let’s spend time alone with the Lord.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
When we watch sports we tend to express ourselves practically. For example, the wide receiver drops an easy pass in the end zone. It should be six points instead of the goose egg.
I’ve yet to hear a fan express his exacerbation with references to the wind velocity, or to geometry and theoretical calculus. The philosophy of football never gets mentioned either! Fans simply blurt out, “Catch the ball, you louse! Why do you think they pay you millions of dollars?” See. Their expression is practical, not theoretical. It is concrete, not abstract.
Inside the college classroom, contrariwise, no student would get by on such utterances. I mean, can you imagine the philosophy professor’s final exam question, which requiring essay input from his students to define Sartre’s existential atheism? One student writes, “It stinks!”
Think the student passed the class? Think again! Practicality has its place, like at the ball park. But practicality won’t fly in the philosophy classroom. Theory and abstraction rule inside those walls of academia. But theory and abstraction don’t grow well in the arid soil of football fans.
The Apostle Paul’s New Testament letters differ significantly in form, compared with the letters of other New Testament writers. Paul wrote using a “Gentile style”, while the others wrote using a “Hebrew style”. The Gentiles, more specifically the Greeks, were theoretical and philosophical. The Hebrews were more practical in their approach.
The letter to the Ephesian Christians affords an excellent example to illustrate the “Gentile style”, if I may be permitted to refer to the distinction by this phraseology. The Greeks enjoyed soaring to theoretical heights in outer space. Indeed, they never missed an opportunity to hear the latest ideas making the breakfast club circuit.
The Hebrews preferred to express themselves in practical expressions of day-to-day living, like, “Catch the ball, you pansy!” Considering the Hebrews provided the world with spiritual leadership rather than sports, this translated into, “Stop sinning!” or, “Pay your tithes!”
Because of the two different approaches—practical vs. theoretical—some folks over the centuries have drawn the conclusion that James and Paul contradicted each other. Paul insisted that Christians are saved by grace through faith apart from works of the Law. James insisted that faith without works is dead. Hmm. Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Mutually exclusive?
In theological terms (i.e., abstract theory) yes, grace and works are mutually exclusive. But once we put the shoe leather to theological doctrine, no, emphatically no!
We will pause here and continue the subject in our next study. In the interim let’s spend time alone with the Lord.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 2
Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called [Ephesians 4:1].
Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Are the two mutually exclusive? Let’s continue this analysis now.
Theologically, grace is a free gift, while works demands a paycheck earned. The two are mutually exclusive theologically.
Now consider the matter in practical terms of day-to-day living. If I plant some corn in the ground, what can I expect to happen? Would you believe a corn stalk should grow out of the ground and ears of corn then grow on the corn stalk? If nothing grows, what can we conclude? We conclude that the corn seed is dead. It is sterile.
It is simple practical reasoning, is it not? James—as well as the Hebrews in general—took such an approach. Should someone claim to know the Lord Jesus and be born again, yet they lived like the pagans, James challenged them, “Faith without works is dead.” And you know, he was right on. The fellow who made claims to salvation was all talk and no walk. He begged the question of his salvation.
Paul had a different approach, a Gentile approach, as I phrased it earlier. Paul noted how life comes from God. The corn can only grow if God gives it life. Man can only cooperate with God, as he attempts to live in God’s world. When God blesses man, it is His grace at work, not His obligation to pay man for his works.
In the case of the corn, God wasn’t obligated to make the corn grow. Man planted it, so did God owed him a living? Not so. Fact of the matter is, when the corn did grow, man owed God his gratitude for God’s gift to Him. Every good and perfect gift is from God. It’s not so practical, is it? No, it’s not. It is theoretical, abstract, theological.
Given this hypothetical example of the corn and James’ analysis as contrasted with Paul’s, we note how the two apostles talked apples and oranges. They didn’t speak on the same subject. It only appears like it.
James talked about how to live as a Christian, while Paul talked about how to become a Christian. Paul said, “Saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.” James said, “Faith without works is dead.”
The two apostles weren’t arguing with each other. James talked Hebrew practicality: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… Paul talked Gentile abstraction: God’s unfathomable love, His mysterious dealings with man, and life as it exists in eternity.
Even after expounding on this distinction, however, we still miss out on the fullness of Paul’s letters. We began this study by quoting Ephesians 4:1. The verse is significant to our purposes in this study, in that it cuts Paul’s letter in half. I don’t mean in terms of size alone, with the first half comprising 50% and the second half the other 50%.
Oops! Out of time again. Not to worry. A little time with the Lord Jesus now, and tomorrow we will finish this topic. See you then!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Are the two mutually exclusive? Let’s continue this analysis now.
Theologically, grace is a free gift, while works demands a paycheck earned. The two are mutually exclusive theologically.
Now consider the matter in practical terms of day-to-day living. If I plant some corn in the ground, what can I expect to happen? Would you believe a corn stalk should grow out of the ground and ears of corn then grow on the corn stalk? If nothing grows, what can we conclude? We conclude that the corn seed is dead. It is sterile.
It is simple practical reasoning, is it not? James—as well as the Hebrews in general—took such an approach. Should someone claim to know the Lord Jesus and be born again, yet they lived like the pagans, James challenged them, “Faith without works is dead.” And you know, he was right on. The fellow who made claims to salvation was all talk and no walk. He begged the question of his salvation.
Paul had a different approach, a Gentile approach, as I phrased it earlier. Paul noted how life comes from God. The corn can only grow if God gives it life. Man can only cooperate with God, as he attempts to live in God’s world. When God blesses man, it is His grace at work, not His obligation to pay man for his works.
In the case of the corn, God wasn’t obligated to make the corn grow. Man planted it, so did God owed him a living? Not so. Fact of the matter is, when the corn did grow, man owed God his gratitude for God’s gift to Him. Every good and perfect gift is from God. It’s not so practical, is it? No, it’s not. It is theoretical, abstract, theological.
Given this hypothetical example of the corn and James’ analysis as contrasted with Paul’s, we note how the two apostles talked apples and oranges. They didn’t speak on the same subject. It only appears like it.
James talked about how to live as a Christian, while Paul talked about how to become a Christian. Paul said, “Saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.” James said, “Faith without works is dead.”
The two apostles weren’t arguing with each other. James talked Hebrew practicality: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… Paul talked Gentile abstraction: God’s unfathomable love, His mysterious dealings with man, and life as it exists in eternity.
Even after expounding on this distinction, however, we still miss out on the fullness of Paul’s letters. We began this study by quoting Ephesians 4:1. The verse is significant to our purposes in this study, in that it cuts Paul’s letter in half. I don’t mean in terms of size alone, with the first half comprising 50% and the second half the other 50%.
Oops! Out of time again. Not to worry. A little time with the Lord Jesus now, and tomorrow we will finish this topic. See you then!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 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 [Ephesians 4:1].
The first half of Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Christians follows the Gentile approach. The second half moves out of the classroom and off to the ball park, presenting the Hebrew approach. In the first half Paul taught abstractions like “grace”, “faith”, “salvation”, “covenant”—abstractions in that the concepts are really from eternity and not from time and space. The Book of Hebrews sheds light on this issue.
But then suddenly at chapter 4 and verse 1, Paul came back down to earth and put wear and tear on his sandals. Paul’s message in the second half (chapters 4-6) goes something like this:
You guys are Christians. You didn’t use to be Christians, but now you are. We Jews were the people of God and you weren’t. Now some of us are Christians and some of you Gentiles are too. We’re in the same boat, you see. It’s called the Church, the Body of Christ. I explained all about this in chapters 1-3, remember?
Now that we understand who we are, let me tell you how it translates into daily living. Because we are children of God, this is how we are to live…
Paul then wrote chapters 4-6 to teach various specifics of practical Christianity, Christian living while on this earth.
In terms of James and the practical Hebrew approach, chapters 4-6 are right up the same alley. In terms of the theoretical Gentile approach, chapters 1-3 hit the nail on the head. Paul, you see, employed both approaches in his letter to the Ephesian Christians. Yea, he followed this form in pretty much all his letters.
Notice the phrase in the quoted text which began this study: “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called.” Two concepts are involved in those words,
1. the calling with which you have been called
2. walk in a manner worthy
Ephesians 1-3 are all about Point #1. Ephesians 4-6 are about Point #2. Having expatiated on the Christian’s calling from God—a call to come out of the darkness and into the kingdom of light—Paul proceeded to explain how this calling looked in shoe leather.
We would do well to grow in our knowledge of the Lord Jesus and in our understanding of salvation. But if we keep it in our heads, we will rightly receive James’ rebuke: faith without works is dead. James employed the word “faith” to depict intellectual knowledge, as contrasted with truth which enters the head and transforms the heart into a new creation.
Do we enjoy being rebuked? We needn’t find out. Let’s learn Ephesians 1-3, and then let us put it into practice as per Ephesians 4-6. Works for me. How about for you?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
The first half of Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Christians follows the Gentile approach. The second half moves out of the classroom and off to the ball park, presenting the Hebrew approach. In the first half Paul taught abstractions like “grace”, “faith”, “salvation”, “covenant”—abstractions in that the concepts are really from eternity and not from time and space. The Book of Hebrews sheds light on this issue.
But then suddenly at chapter 4 and verse 1, Paul came back down to earth and put wear and tear on his sandals. Paul’s message in the second half (chapters 4-6) goes something like this:
You guys are Christians. You didn’t use to be Christians, but now you are. We Jews were the people of God and you weren’t. Now some of us are Christians and some of you Gentiles are too. We’re in the same boat, you see. It’s called the Church, the Body of Christ. I explained all about this in chapters 1-3, remember?
Now that we understand who we are, let me tell you how it translates into daily living. Because we are children of God, this is how we are to live…
Paul then wrote chapters 4-6 to teach various specifics of practical Christianity, Christian living while on this earth.
In terms of James and the practical Hebrew approach, chapters 4-6 are right up the same alley. In terms of the theoretical Gentile approach, chapters 1-3 hit the nail on the head. Paul, you see, employed both approaches in his letter to the Ephesian Christians. Yea, he followed this form in pretty much all his letters.
Notice the phrase in the quoted text which began this study: “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called.” Two concepts are involved in those words,
1. the calling with which you have been called
2. walk in a manner worthy
Ephesians 1-3 are all about Point #1. Ephesians 4-6 are about Point #2. Having expatiated on the Christian’s calling from God—a call to come out of the darkness and into the kingdom of light—Paul proceeded to explain how this calling looked in shoe leather.
We would do well to grow in our knowledge of the Lord Jesus and in our understanding of salvation. But if we keep it in our heads, we will rightly receive James’ rebuke: faith without works is dead. James employed the word “faith” to depict intellectual knowledge, as contrasted with truth which enters the head and transforms the heart into a new creation.
Do we enjoy being rebuked? We needn’t find out. Let’s learn Ephesians 1-3, and then let us put it into practice as per Ephesians 4-6. Works for me. How about for you?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 1
Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called [Ephesians 4:1].
When we watch sports we tend to express ourselves practically. For example, the wide receiver drops an easy pass in the end zone. It should be six points instead of the goose egg.
I’ve yet to hear a fan express his exacerbation with references to the wind velocity, or to geometry and theoretical calculus. The philosophy of football never gets mentioned either! Fans simply blurt out, “Catch the ball, you louse! Why do you think they pay you millions of dollars?” See. Their expression is practical, not theoretical. It is concrete, not abstract.
Inside the college classroom, contrariwise, no student would get by on such utterances. I mean, can you imagine the philosophy professor’s final exam question, which requires essay input from his students to define Sartre’s existential atheism? One student writes, “It stinks!”
Think the student passed the class? Think again! Practicality has its place, like at the ball park. But practicality won’t fly in the philosophy classroom. Theory and abstraction rule inside those walls of academia. But theory and abstraction don’t grow well in the arid soil of football fans.
The Apostle Paul’s New Testament letters differ significantly in form, compared with the letters of other New Testament writers. Paul wrote using a “Gentile style”, while the others wrote using a “Hebrew style”. The Gentiles, more specifically the Greeks, were theoretical and philosophical. The Hebrews were more practical in their approach.
The letter to the Ephesian Christians affords an excellent example to illustrate the “Gentile style”, if I may be permitted to refer to the distinction by this phraseology. The Greeks enjoyed soaring to theoretical heights in outer space. Indeed, they never missed an opportunity to hear the latest ideas making the breakfast club circuit.
The Hebrews preferred to express themselves in practical expressions of day-to-day living, like, “Catch the ball, you pansy!” Considering that the Hebrews provided the world with spiritual leadership rather than sports, this translated into, “Stop sinning!” or, “Pay your tithes!”
Because of the two different approaches—practical vs. theoretical—some folks over the centuries have drawn the conclusion that James and Paul contradicted each other. Paul insisted that Christians are saved by grace through faith apart from works of the Law. James insisted that faith without works is dead. Hmm. Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Mutually exclusive?
In theological terms (i.e., abstract theory) yes, grace and works are mutually exclusive. But once we put the shoe leather to theological doctrine, no, emphatically no!
We will pause here and continue the subject in our next study. In the interim let’s spend time alone with the Lord.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
When we watch sports we tend to express ourselves practically. For example, the wide receiver drops an easy pass in the end zone. It should be six points instead of the goose egg.
I’ve yet to hear a fan express his exacerbation with references to the wind velocity, or to geometry and theoretical calculus. The philosophy of football never gets mentioned either! Fans simply blurt out, “Catch the ball, you louse! Why do you think they pay you millions of dollars?” See. Their expression is practical, not theoretical. It is concrete, not abstract.
Inside the college classroom, contrariwise, no student would get by on such utterances. I mean, can you imagine the philosophy professor’s final exam question, which requires essay input from his students to define Sartre’s existential atheism? One student writes, “It stinks!”
Think the student passed the class? Think again! Practicality has its place, like at the ball park. But practicality won’t fly in the philosophy classroom. Theory and abstraction rule inside those walls of academia. But theory and abstraction don’t grow well in the arid soil of football fans.
The Apostle Paul’s New Testament letters differ significantly in form, compared with the letters of other New Testament writers. Paul wrote using a “Gentile style”, while the others wrote using a “Hebrew style”. The Gentiles, more specifically the Greeks, were theoretical and philosophical. The Hebrews were more practical in their approach.
The letter to the Ephesian Christians affords an excellent example to illustrate the “Gentile style”, if I may be permitted to refer to the distinction by this phraseology. The Greeks enjoyed soaring to theoretical heights in outer space. Indeed, they never missed an opportunity to hear the latest ideas making the breakfast club circuit.
The Hebrews preferred to express themselves in practical expressions of day-to-day living, like, “Catch the ball, you pansy!” Considering that the Hebrews provided the world with spiritual leadership rather than sports, this translated into, “Stop sinning!” or, “Pay your tithes!”
Because of the two different approaches—practical vs. theoretical—some folks over the centuries have drawn the conclusion that James and Paul contradicted each other. Paul insisted that Christians are saved by grace through faith apart from works of the Law. James insisted that faith without works is dead. Hmm. Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Mutually exclusive?
In theological terms (i.e., abstract theory) yes, grace and works are mutually exclusive. But once we put the shoe leather to theological doctrine, no, emphatically no!
We will pause here and continue the subject in our next study. In the interim let’s spend time alone with the Lord.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 2
Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called [Ephesians 4:1].
Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Are the two mutually exclusive? Let’s continue this analysis now.
Theologically, grace is a free gift, while works demands a paycheck earned. The two are mutually exclusive theologically.
Now consider the matter in practical terms of day-to-day living. If I plant some corn in the ground, what can I expect to happen? Would you believe a corn stalk should grow out of the ground and ears of corn then grow on the corn stalk? If nothing grows, what can we conclude? We conclude that the corn seed is dead. It is sterile.
It is simple practical reasoning, is it not? James—as well as the Hebrews in general—took such an approach. Should someone claim to know the Lord Jesus and be born again, yet they lived like the pagans, James challenged them, “Faith without works is dead.” And you know, he was right on. The fellow who made claims to salvation was all talk and no walk. He begged the question of his salvation.
Paul had a different approach, a Gentile approach, as I phrased it earlier. Paul noted how life comes from God. The corn can only grow if God gives it life. Man can only cooperate with God, as he attempts to live in God’s world. When God blesses man, it is His grace at work, not His obligation to pay man for his works.
In the case of the corn, God wasn’t obligated to make the corn grow. Man planted it, so did God owe him a living? Not so. Fact of the matter is, when the corn did grow, man owed God his gratitude for God’s gift to Him. Every good and perfect gift is from God. It’s not so practical, is it? No, it’s not. It is theoretical, abstract, theological.
Given this hypothetical example of the corn and James’ analysis as contrasted with Paul’s, we note how the two apostles talked apples and oranges. They didn’t speak on the same subject. It only appears like it.
James talked about how to live as a Christian, while Paul talked about how to become a Christian. Paul said, “Saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.” James said, “Faith without works is dead.”
The two apostles weren’t arguing with each other. James talked Hebrew practicality: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… Paul talked Gentile abstraction: God’s unfathomable love, His mysterious dealings with man, and life as it exists in eternity.
Even after expounding on this distinction, however, we still miss out on the fullness of Paul’s letters. We began this study by quoting Ephesians 4:1. The verse is significant to our purposes in this study, in that it cuts Paul’s letter in half. I don’t mean in terms of size alone, with the first half comprising 50% and the second half the other 50%.
Oops! Out of time again. Not to worry. A little time with the Lord Jesus now, and tomorrow we will finish this topic. See you then!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Paul insisted on grace, James on works. Are the two mutually exclusive? Let’s continue this analysis now.
Theologically, grace is a free gift, while works demands a paycheck earned. The two are mutually exclusive theologically.
Now consider the matter in practical terms of day-to-day living. If I plant some corn in the ground, what can I expect to happen? Would you believe a corn stalk should grow out of the ground and ears of corn then grow on the corn stalk? If nothing grows, what can we conclude? We conclude that the corn seed is dead. It is sterile.
It is simple practical reasoning, is it not? James—as well as the Hebrews in general—took such an approach. Should someone claim to know the Lord Jesus and be born again, yet they lived like the pagans, James challenged them, “Faith without works is dead.” And you know, he was right on. The fellow who made claims to salvation was all talk and no walk. He begged the question of his salvation.
Paul had a different approach, a Gentile approach, as I phrased it earlier. Paul noted how life comes from God. The corn can only grow if God gives it life. Man can only cooperate with God, as he attempts to live in God’s world. When God blesses man, it is His grace at work, not His obligation to pay man for his works.
In the case of the corn, God wasn’t obligated to make the corn grow. Man planted it, so did God owe him a living? Not so. Fact of the matter is, when the corn did grow, man owed God his gratitude for God’s gift to Him. Every good and perfect gift is from God. It’s not so practical, is it? No, it’s not. It is theoretical, abstract, theological.
Given this hypothetical example of the corn and James’ analysis as contrasted with Paul’s, we note how the two apostles talked apples and oranges. They didn’t speak on the same subject. It only appears like it.
James talked about how to live as a Christian, while Paul talked about how to become a Christian. Paul said, “Saved by grace through faith apart from the works of the Law.” James said, “Faith without works is dead.”
The two apostles weren’t arguing with each other. James talked Hebrew practicality: if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck… Paul talked Gentile abstraction: God’s unfathomable love, His mysterious dealings with man, and life as it exists in eternity.
Even after expounding on this distinction, however, we still miss out on the fullness of Paul’s letters. We began this study by quoting Ephesians 4:1. The verse is significant to our purposes in this study, in that it cuts Paul’s letter in half. I don’t mean in terms of size alone, with the first half comprising 50% and the second half the other 50%.
Oops! Out of time again. Not to worry. A little time with the Lord Jesus now, and tomorrow we will finish this topic. See you then!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
Philosophy Class at the Ball Park – Part 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 [Ephesians 4:1].
The first half of Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Christians follows the Gentile approach. The second half moves out of the classroom and off to the ball park, presenting the Hebrew approach. In the first half Paul taught abstractions like “grace”, “faith”, “salvation”, “covenant”—abstractions in that the concepts are really from eternity and not from time and space. The Book of Hebrews sheds light on this issue.
But then suddenly at chapter 4 and verse 1, Paul came back down to earth and put wear and tear on his sandals. Paul’s message in the second half (chapters 4-6) goes something like this:
You guys are Christians. You didn’t use to be Christians, but now you are. We Jews were the people of God and you weren’t. Now some of us are Christians and some of you Gentiles are too. We’re in the same boat, you see. It’s called the Church, the Body of Christ. I explained all about this in chapters 1-3, remember?
Now that we understand who we are, let me tell you how it translates into daily living. Because we are children of God, this is how we are to live…
Paul then wrote chapters 4-6 to teach various specifics of practical Christianity, Christian living while on this earth.
In terms of James and the practical Hebrew approach, chapters 4-6 are right up the same alley. In terms of the theoretical Gentile approach, chapters 1-3 hit the nail on the head. Paul, you see, employed both approaches in his letter to the Ephesian Christians. Yea, he followed this form in pretty much all his letters.
Notice the phrase in the quoted text which began this study: “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called.” Two concepts are involved in those words,
1. the calling with which you have been called
2. walk in a manner worthy
Ephesians 1-3 are all about Point #1. Ephesians 4-6 are about Point #2. Having expatiated on the Christian’s calling from God—a call to come out of the darkness and into the kingdom of light—Paul proceeded to explain how this calling looked in shoe leather.
We would do well to grow in our knowledge of the Lord Jesus and in our understanding of salvation. But if we keep it in our heads, we will rightly receive James’ rebuke: faith without works is dead. James employed the word “faith” to depict intellectual knowledge, as contrasted with truth which enters the head and transforms the heart into a new creation.
Do we enjoy being rebuked? We needn’t find out. Let’s learn Ephesians 1-3, and then let us put it into practice as per Ephesians 4-6. Works for me. How about for you?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
The first half of Paul’s letter to the Ephesian Christians follows the Gentile approach. The second half moves out of the classroom and off to the ball park, presenting the Hebrew approach. In the first half Paul taught abstractions like “grace”, “faith”, “salvation”, “covenant”—abstractions in that the concepts are really from eternity and not from time and space. The Book of Hebrews sheds light on this issue.
But then suddenly at chapter 4 and verse 1, Paul came back down to earth and put wear and tear on his sandals. Paul’s message in the second half (chapters 4-6) goes something like this:
You guys are Christians. You didn’t use to be Christians, but now you are. We Jews were the people of God and you weren’t. Now some of us are Christians and some of you Gentiles are too. We’re in the same boat, you see. It’s called the Church, the Body of Christ. I explained all about this in chapters 1-3, remember?
Now that we understand who we are, let me tell you how it translates into daily living. Because we are children of God, this is how we are to live…
Paul then wrote chapters 4-6 to teach various specifics of practical Christianity, Christian living while on this earth.
In terms of James and the practical Hebrew approach, chapters 4-6 are right up the same alley. In terms of the theoretical Gentile approach, chapters 1-3 hit the nail on the head. Paul, you see, employed both approaches in his letter to the Ephesian Christians. Yea, he followed this form in pretty much all his letters.
Notice the phrase in the quoted text which began this study: “Walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called.” Two concepts are involved in those words,
1. the calling with which you have been called
2. walk in a manner worthy
Ephesians 1-3 are all about Point #1. Ephesians 4-6 are about Point #2. Having expatiated on the Christian’s calling from God—a call to come out of the darkness and into the kingdom of light—Paul proceeded to explain how this calling looked in shoe leather.
We would do well to grow in our knowledge of the Lord Jesus and in our understanding of salvation. But if we keep it in our heads, we will rightly receive James’ rebuke: faith without works is dead. James employed the word “faith” to depict intellectual knowledge, as contrasted with truth which enters the head and transforms the heart into a new creation.
Do we enjoy being rebuked? We needn’t find out. Let’s learn Ephesians 1-3, and then let us put it into practice as per Ephesians 4-6. Works for me. How about for you?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Numbers: Volume 4 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
