Category Archives: New Testament

Posted on

Life is for God’s purpose

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (John 1:1)

All things were created through Him and for Him (Col 1:16)

In him was life, and the life was the light for humanity (John 1:4)

You [God] created all things, and on account of your will they were and were created (Rev 4:11)

So why would we live for anything other than God’s eternal purpose in Christ?

Those whom he foreknew, he also decided in advance to be conformed to the image of his Son, so that he would be the firstborn among many siblings; and whom he decided in advance, these he also called; and whom he called, these he also put right with himself; and whom he put right with himself, these he also glorified (Rom 8:30)

Posted on

Blessed professions—Ephesians 4:11-13

Some of us are sometimes tempted to think that God uses only ministers in the more technical sense. But God appointed ministries of the Word to equip all the saints for their respective ministries, to be lights in the respective places where they serve and live and study (Eph 4:11-13). “The gifts he gave were that some would be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ” (Eph 4:11-12, NRSV)

Some of those other skills, such as health work and agriculture, address some of the very issues that Jesus cared about (as demonstrated by his healings and feeding multitudes). (That Jesus would have approved of doing what we can to provide outside of miracles is suggested by him telling his disciples, after the feeding miracle, to gather up the leftovers. That is, they wouldn’t need a miracle for their next meal.) Thank God for a prophetically insightful public administrator like Joseph, who was able to save many lives from famine (Gen 45:5, 7; 50:20). Priests became dermatologists when they had to examine people for what were believed to be contagious skin diseases (Lev 13:2-43). Somebody presumably took care of safety inspections (Deut 22:8).

Granted, in the Old Testament, we especially see the Spirit empowering God’s servants to prophesy or lead (e.g., Deut 34:9), and of worship worship leading (1 Chron 25:1-5) and other songs (1 Kgs 4:32; Song of Solomon). But we also see the Spirit filling Bezalel for artistic and architectural activity that honors God (Exod 31:3; 35:31; 36:1). The seven new officers of the church in Acts 6:3 initially must be full of the Spirit and wisdom for their work in administration and finance. God also gave Solomon special wisdom for judging (1 Kgs 3:9-28). Let’s not forget the Spirit filling Samson with superhuman strength (though the purpose was delivering Israel and not just winning prizes in competitions). God’s Spirit came on Mary to be a Mom (though in a special way for the virgin birth, which was for only one occasion in history).

Are you interested in biology, genetics and the like? Many discoveries in these areas can lead to improvements in health care. But of course the sciences hold their own interest. Proverbs 25:2 might speak of those who had leisure (i.e., not farming or other responsibilities) to seek knowledge: “It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out” (NRSV). (Even though we will never run out of hidden things, Deut 29:29.) Solomon had a passionate interest in biology and its applications; this was part of his God-given wisdom: “He spoke about plant life, from the cedar of Lebanon to the hyssop that grows out of walls. He also spoke about animals and birds, reptiles and fish” (1 Kgs 4:33, NIV)

There are plenty of military officers, though this was closer to their calling and empowerment in Old Testament periods where God’s purposes were closely tied to a nation (in Acts, we see many following the Lord but not so much specifically because of them being in the military, since the Roman military was not used only for just wars and certainly not for holy ones).

Even for other kinds of subsequent ministry, God used people’s various backgrounds as models for what they would do, such as shepherds (of sheep and then people), fishers (of fish and then people), accountants (tax collectors), scribes (Matt 13:52), carpenters, and the like. (Pastoral counseling counts as a pastoral/shepherd gift; cf. e.g., Ezek 34:2, 4.) (If plumbers and aeronautic engineers don’t appear on this list, it is because they didn’t exist in the biblical cultures yet. Only rich people had indoor plumbing, and hiking up the Acrocorinth, which I got to do once, was the closest anybody got to physical space travel.) Paul, of course, was sometimes bivocational as a leather worker (or tentmaker, depending on how you translate that); given what we know about this profession, that probably included sales also.

These are just a sample of the sorts of callings that God used, partly limited by the range of examples available in antiquity and partly because I thought these examples should suffice. (I could have listed many more). Further, many other callings are implied; our advanced economies and information technology allows us to specialize in ways not possible in antiquity. Community concerns for law enforcement, sanitation, and the like were handled differently but were matters of concern then as now. Given ancient values on hospitality and the making and selling of textiles even from homes, the polite behavior we expect in service industries was probably shared more widely in the culture.

So if your particular area isn’t in the list, don’t feel like it shouldn’t be. Obviously there are some spheres in which Christians cannot work, such as drug dealer or pimp (gangster boss Mickey Cohen, converted in a mid-twentieth century evangelism meeting, didn’t persevere in faith when he realized it would cost him his profession). But for the most part, God uses us in a range of professions, always in our witness for Christ and often even through the ways we serve through the profession itself.

Those of us who are called to use Scripture to equip the saints for their ministries (Eph 4:11-13) should remember this and encourage people in our congregations to flourish in their range of professions.

Posted on

The faithless prayer meeting—Acts 12:5-16

Have you ever been in a situation where you felt like you didn’t have enough faith to pray? Or where something turned out differently than you’d hoped, and you assumed that it was because you lacked faith? Or where God answered your prayers, but you weren’t sure it was God or you initially couldn’t believe that it really happened?

In Acts 12, James, brother of John, is arrested and executed by King Herod Agrippa I. Jesus explained that the twelve apostles would sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes (Luke 22:30); he did not say that it would happen before their death and resurrection (Mark 10:38-39). For those who expected the kingdom immediately, however, the death of one of the apostles was a faith-testing event. James was not only one of the twelve, but one of the three closest to Jesus (Luke 8:51; 9:28).

Now Peter, leader of the twelve, is arrested and scheduled to face the same fate. The church prays fervently for his release (12:5). While believers pray, an angel of the Lord comes and leads Peter out of the prison, and he heads for a Christian household where, it turns out, believers are praying (12:12). Yet when he first arrives, the believers initially do not believe that their prayer is answered.

The narrative bristles with irony:

  • Israelites at the first Passover were girded and sandaled, ready to escape captivity (Exod 12:11)—in contrast to Peter, at a later Passover season (Acts 12:4, 8)
  • Whereas the church is praying fervently for his deliverance (12:5, 12), Peter is sound asleep (12:6-7; cf. Luke 22:45)
  • Neither the people praying (Acts 12:12, 15) nor Peter himself (12:9) initially believe his release
  • Peter thought the angel he was seeing was a “vision” (12:7) just as Jesus’s male followers once had supposed that his female followers saw only a “vision” of angels (Luke 24:23)
  • An angel frees Peter (Acts 12:7-11) but his supporters suppose him an angel (or ghost; 12:15)—as some supposed when they saw the risen Lord (Luke 24:37)
  • When a woman joyfully proclaims his survival (Acts 12:14), others faithlessly dismiss her testimony like that of the women at the tomb (Luke 24:11)
  • Whereas Peter’s guards in 12:6, 10 fail to keep him in, in 12:13-15 his own supporters keep Peter out
  • Whereas the iron gate in 12:10 opens of its own accord, in 12:14 the gate of the house where fellow-Christians pray for his safety remains barred to him
  • Whereas Peter comes to his senses only when he recognizes that the “vision” (12:9) is real (12:11), believers accuse Rhoda of madness (12:15) for declaring Peter’s presence

To borrow an analogy from Luke’s Gospel, Those inside have been “knocking” in prayer that a figurative door may be “opened” for them (Luke 11:5-10), for Peter’s release (Acts 12:5, 12)—yet fail to believe that the answer to their prayers is knocking on their door!

We can be happy that God is not limited to acting on our faith. That was certainly the case when Gabriel was sent to Zechariah to let him know that his wife Elisabeth was going to have a son (Luke 1:18-20). (Moses certainly didn’t have faith to make the burning bush burn.) To a lesser extent, it was also true when believers were praying for Peter’s release from Herod Agrippa’s plans to kill him in Acts 12:5-16.

But while their faith wasn’t perfect, they had enough faith to pray. They came to the right place with their needs. Although I called this a “faithless prayer meeting,” they weren’t really faithless; they just had limited faith that didn’t match God’s much greater power. It takes just a mustard seed, because the real issue is not how big is our faith, but how big is the God in whom we trust. That is, we don’t need to put faith in our faith, as if faith itself is a force of imagination that makes things happen. We can trust a God who is bigger than us being perfect or having everything figured out. Yes, God invites us to have faith. Yes, confidence in him matters. But we can thank God that he is not controlled by or limited to our faith. He is bigger than we can ask or imagine, and we grow deeper in faith as we witness and consider his gracious acts.

Posted on

Elijah in Mark 1:2

In Mark 1:2-3, Mark speaks of the messenger who prepares the way for YHWH. Mark links together two verses from the prophets addressing one who would prepare the way for YHWH’s coming. One is Malachi 3:1; the other isIsaiah 40:3. Mark may have learned the verses separately (cf. Matt 11:10//Luke7:27), but he follows good ancient Jewish interpretive procedure in linking verses that share a common theme, and especially common language. Both passages speak of one who will “prepare the way” of YHWH. (In their contexts, they share some other common wording; Isaiah’s “my messenger,” God’s own people, act as deaf and blind in Isa 42:19.)

Mark blends them so thoroughly that he names only the better-known prophet when he attributes them: Isaiah. This is helpful in focusing the reader’s attention on the larger context of this section of Isaiah, as noted in the preceding post on Mark 1:1.

But what about Malachi? Does Mark think at all of Malachi’s context? Malachi expects consuming fire when YHWH comes (Mal 3:2; 4:1), an expectation also held by John the Baptist in Matt 3:11//Luke 3:16. But Malachi returns to the preparer in Mal 4:5-6: this is the prophet Elijah, who will turn or restore people’s hearts, preparing them lest YHWH strike the land when he comes. (Jesus uses the Greek version’s term for “restore” for John’s mission as Elijah in Mark 9:12; it applies to Jesus’s healings in Mark 3:5 and 8:25.)

This verse prepares us to recognize John the Baptist as the promised preparer for YHWH. Sure enough, John is recognizable as Elijah in Mark’s introduction. He does not call down fire on his challengers or on a sacrifice on a mountain. What he does do is come at the Jordan (Mark 1:5), in the wilderness (Mark 1:4), and, most distinctively, wearing a leather belt around his waist (Mark 1:6). Elijah had ascended just past the Jordan (2 Kgs 2:6, 13), had spent time in the wilderness (1 Kgs 19:4), and, most importantly, is depicted specifically as wearing a leather belt around his waist (2 Kgs 1:8). However common or uncommon such belts may have been, the only passage in the Old Testament mentioning a leather belt is 2 Kgs 1:8, and the only passages in the New Testament mentioning it are those introducing John (Matt 3:4; Mark 1:6). Both use exactly the same two terms; this is the New Testament’s only use of the term translated “leather.”

Why is it so significant that John fills a role like Elijah? If John fulfills Malachi 3:1, then John prepares the way for YHWH. But Mark identifies John as preparing the way for the Spirit-baptizer (Mark 1:8), for Jesus. In the Old Testament, only YHWH may pour out YHWH’s own Spirit. Mark thus recognizes that Jesus is YHWH himself, the one who baptizes in the Spirit (Mark 1:8). Ergo: Jesus is Lord.

Posted on

Good News about Jesus Christ and the introduction to Mark’s Gospel—Mark 1:1

Mark titles either his Gospel or its opening words with,“the beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ, God’s Son.” So even a previously uninformed reader knows Jesus’s identity from the start, even as it unfolds only gradually in the narrative. It’s no surprise when the Father honors Jesus as his Son in Mark 1:11. What is more of a surprise for the uninformed reader will be how little his human contemporaries recognize him, and how the Gospel will climax in and elaborate the crucifixion of God’s Son.

“Good news,” or euangelion, applied to all sorts of things in Greek, but given Mark’s signaled interest in Isaiah in v. 2, it probably evokes the promised good news of Israel’s restoration emphasized there. In v. 3, Mark will note the herald of Isa 40:3 who prepares the way for YHWH, who leads his people through the wilderness in a new exodus, bringing them back to their land from exile and restoring them. Many Jews had resettled in the land, but they still awaited the full restoration of their people, along with the renewed creation God had promised (such as new heavens and new earth, Isa 65:17; 66:22). Isaiah goes on to speak of this way-preparing herald in terms of the remnant of God’s people, announcing good tidings to the rest of them (Isa 40:9, the standard Greek translation twice using the verb euaggelizô).

The next use of this verb in standard Greek translation of Isaiah appears in Isa 52:7, speaking of the messenger who “brings good news” (euangelizomenou) about peace for God’s people, who brings good news (euangelizomenos) involving salvation and God’s reign. In this context in Isaiah, this is good news that judgment has ended, and God is restoring his people. Isaiah 52:7 speaks of this as the good news, or gospel, of peace, of salvation, and of God’s kingdom.

That Mark wants to emphasize good news is clear because it frames Mark’s introduction. Mark treats John the Baptist as the optimum model of this herald, this way-preparer for YHWH, as he prepares the way for Jesus. (This should also let the biblically informed reader of Mark know something further about Jesus’s identity: he is YHWH.) But after John the Baptist’s arrest in 1:14, Jesus begins the public ministry that Mark’s Gospel addresses. Mark describes it this way: “Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming God’s good news, by saying: ‘The time has been fulfilled! God’s kingdom has drawn near! Turn your lives around and depend on the good news!” (Mark 1:14-15).

That Mark’s understanding of this good news evokes Isaiah is also clear because of the mention of God’s kingdom, or God’s reign, as part of this good news (1:15). Remember Isa 52:7: part of this good news is, “Our God reigns.” Other Scripture praised God’s kingship as most evident in the conspicuous day of God’s justice (e.g., Ps 93:1; 96:10; 97:1; 99:1). It would be the kingdom that would shatter temporary earthly kingdoms with an eternal one (Dan 2:44), the kingdom of the Son of Man (Dan 7:14) and his people (7:18, 27). Jesus, too, places no trust in such temporary kingdoms and rulers (Mark 13:8-9).

Jesus uses “kingship” language to describe the content of his parabolic teaching (Mark 4:11, 26, 30; 9:47); it contrasts with the pseudo-royal governor of Galilee (6:14, 22-27) who executes God’s herald (6:27). Disciples see a foretaste of kingdom glory (8:38—9:1) in Jesus’s transfiguration (9:2). As Jesus enters Jerusalem, the crowds hail the promised kingdom of the Davidic king (11:10)—although they may overplay the Davidic part (12:37). Jesus announces to his disciples that they will share in the expected messianic banquet with him in God’s kingdom (14:25)—though separation between them must intervene.

Here we can begin to catch the irony of this “kingdom” from a human vantage point. But Jesus declares that this kingdom belongs to children (10:14-15) and to those who love their neighbor (12:34). He brings it not to prestigious and powerful people such as Herod Antipas, Jerusalem’s high council, Pilate, or to those proud of their wealth (10:23-25), but to people who are disabled (such as blind beggars), who are socially marginalized (such as tax collectors), and to others who are the antithesis of social prestige. (One prestigious person, Joseph of Arimathea, does somehow get the kingdom message closer to right than his colleagues; 15:43.)

But from here on out, Mark’s Gospel uses royal language almost exclusively in one way: for Jesus as the rejected king of his people, crowned with thorns and enthroned on a cross (Mark 15:2, 9, 12, 18, 26, 32, 43). We should have suspected as much, when already in the introduction the kingdom herald John was arrested (1:14), and in the last verse about “king” Herod Antipas Mark gets beheaded (6:27). The kingdom of this world was not ready to give up its worldly power.

Yet Jesus will return to Galilee to meet his disciples (16:7), so the preaching of the good news will start again, and spread among all nations (13:10), even in the face of hostility (13:9-11).

The fulness of the kingdom will come. Jesus’s signs of and teaching about the kingdom will prevail. But Mark is realistic about this world. This world’s kingdom’s will not surrender until the Son of Man returns (8:38; 13:26; 14:62). In Daniel, the reign of the Son of Man (the human one [Dan 7:13-14], contrasted with the preceding kingdoms depicted as beasts [7:3-8]) is linked with the triumph of the consecrated ones of the Most High (7:22, 27)—after suffering (7:21, 25). Let no one deceive you: suffering continues in this present age. But also let no one deceive you that this age is all there is. The fullness of our promised home is yet to come.

Posted on

Immigrants and welfare in Jerusalem—Acts 6:1-6

A conflict arose between the Hellenist and Hebrew Jewish followers of Jesus in Jerusalem in Acts 6:1. Most of the Hellenists spoke only Greek, having originated in the Diaspora. They included “Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and others of those from Cilicia and Asia” (6:9). These immigrant Jews remained loyal to the temple; most settled in their ancestors’ homeland precisely because they retained respect for its institutions and customs. This conflict in the church thus pitted local Judeans against immigrant coreligionists.

Today we read about conflicts between local people and immigrants in many places, and it is helpful to understand that such conflicts are not new. (Lest I be accused of simply pandering to the news cycles, I started with the biblical text before and during the writing of my Acts commentary, published in 2012-2015, and only after my initial exegesis did I consider analogies and applications.)

Analogies today can help make their predicament in the text feel more concrete. For example, many people from former French colonies have migrated to France and found less opportunity there than they had expected. (A closer ancient parallel to that in the first century would be the many provincials who settled in Rome, but that would be background for a different lesson.) Some, in fact, have found discrimination, something that my wife experienced during her education in France (though she also received great blessings from others there). Or we may consider Latino/a immigrants in the United States, some even with ancestral ties to parts of the U.S. that were once part of Mexico. (That was nearly two centuries ago—about twice as long as a Roman general had deported Judeans to Rome before the scene in Acts 6.)

Any such analogies have weaknesses; boundaries within the empire were porous for travel, for example, but those who were not indigenous to a city could remain “resident aliens” rather than citizens for generations! The analogies do, however, help us to feel more concretely the sorts of feelings reflected in Luke’s description of the text, and that he might have expected his audience to feel. Much of Luke’s audience probably lived in urban areas with significant populations of resident aliens. The churches would include a mixture of both resident aliens and long-time citizens, with the former probably predominating (at least in Roman colonies, where most Jews and Greeks were resident aliens). Because many were gentiles and all lived in the Greek-speaking Diaspora, however, they would probably identify first of all with the Hellenists rather than the Hebrews.

In the Jerusalem church, the immigrant widows complained that they were not receiving their fare share of the community’s care for needy widows (6:1). Back then, most women could not earn very much, and most widows were dependent on their social networks for support. Based on biblical teaching about caring for widows, Jewish communities provided for their own widows. But in this period, the support seems to have been local, through relatives or local synagogues. But Hellenists, some of whom settled in Jerusalem in old age, probably had a disproportionate number of widows. Certainly they had fewer local relatives to support them. Not surprisingly then, Hellenist widows received less support. And, not unlike today, problems from the wider society also could impact the church.

Luke emphatically favors concern and respect for widows (Luke 2:37; 4:25-26; 7:12; 18:3-5; 20:47; 21:2-3; Acts 9:39-41). At the same time, his term for their “complaining” is not a positive one, either in his work (Luke 5:30; 15:2; 19:7; cf. 12:13) or in biblical precedent (see Exod 16:7-9, 12; 17:3; Num 14:27, 29; 16:41; 17:5, 10; Ps 106:25). If the term suggests that their approach to the problem was less than ideal, perhaps they did not try to raise the problem with the leadership (not that leadership always listens).

In whatever manner we construe their complaining, however, it soon becomes clear that the apostles consider their cause to be just (or, at the very least, not worth dividing over, Acts 6:3).

Even though Luke does not explicitly identify the Galilean apostles among the “Hebrews” against whom the widows complained, the apostles were in charge of the food distribution program (Acts 4:34-35), so they bore ultimate responsibility for solving the problem. Luke may use the massive growth of the church (6:1a) to help explain how the apostles had missed the problem, but what is clearer is that they move quickly to remedy the situation.

The apostles hand over the food distribution program to others. Matters had grown too large for personal attention even to each of the sick who needed healing (Acts 5:15-16; cf. Luke 5:15-16, 19; 8:19; 19:3), so the apostles follow Jesus’s example and delegate (Luke 9:1-2; 10:1-2). (One may compare how inappropriate complaints in Num 11:1 nevertheless led to the appointment and Spirit-filling of seventy elders in Num 11:16-17. The apostles, however, most clearly evoke Exod 18:19-21; Num 27:18-20; and Deut 34:9.)

These were not simply any new leaders, however. Although only a minority of Judean residents had Greek names, all seven of the new leaders have Greek names (Acts 6:5). They are not only Hellenists, but very conspicuously Hellenists. The community selected (6:3, 5) and the apostles blessed (6:6) members of the offended minority group.

But again, these were not merely any members of the minority group, but those whom both groups could trust to put God’s work first and to act fairly (6:3). The church was growing in cultural diversity and needed culturally diverse leaders (cf. 13:1); whoever was truly full of the Spirit and wisdom could be trusted in the other matters. (Genuine fullness of the Spirit needs to be spiritually discerned, but it is not limited by culture or ethnicity.)

Why appoint diverse leaders? Perhaps for the peace of the community. Or perhaps because those culturally closer to the situation could more readily see needs that Hebrew “blind spots” had missed. Or perhaps both. In Acts 8, the culturally sensitive Hellenist Philip paves the way for Peter’s ministry to Samaritans and Gentiles. In Acts 15, the church seeks a consensus solution, at least sufficient for working agreement.

I know from experience that if I state applications here that I think should be obvious, some will protest and accuse me of mixing my opinions with Scripture. So instead, I offer an invitation. Pray about what I have highlighted in this passage. Ask the Lord what he may want you to do about it.

 

Posted on

Struck Dead—Acts 5:1-11

Ananias and Sapphira wanted to look sold out to God like so many others in the heat of revival. Others, moved by God’s Spirit, were selling property to meet the needs of the poor (Acts 4:31-35), including a disciple named Barnabas (4:36-37). But instead of being sincere in their devotion, Ananias and Sapphira faked it—and God struck them each dead (Acts 5:1-11).

It wasn’t because they didn’t give everything—what they did with the money was still their own choice (5:4). (It was not like the Qumran sect, where everybody who wanted to join contributed their goods, though they could get them back at the end of a year if they decided to leave.) It was because they pretended to be what they were not. God does not want pretend revival; hypocrisy can corrupt the entire movement, if not exposed and expunged (Luke 12:1-2). Like a little yeast that spreads throughout the loaf (1 Cor 5:6; Gal 5:9) or cancer that metastasizes throughout the body (cf. 2 Tim 2:17), fake commitment can infect the entire community and turn real revival into fleshly imitation revival, a toxic substitute for the real thing.

Some of the wording of Acts 5 recalls wording from Joshua 7. Achan kept for himself some of the things from Jericho that had been devoted to the Lord for destruction. Perhaps because of Jericho’s devotion to false gods, everything in Jericho was spiritually polluted, and had to be destroyed (Josh 6:17-18, 21; cf. Exod 22:20; Deut 7:25-26; 13:17), except perhaps for what could be purified by fire and consecrated to the Lord (Num 31:22-23; Josh 6:19, 24). By violating this ban and bringing what was spiritually impure into the camp, Achan removed God’s hand of protection, leading to the deaths of other people (Josh 7:5).

The situation could be remedied only by destroying what was corrupted—now including Achan. Achan’s family surely knew about him hiding the loot under the tent floor, yet they went along with him in the secret, valuing the wealth or family ties above God’s commandment. In contrast to Rahab, who hid Israelite spies on her roof and rescued her family, Achan hid loot under his tent and brought death to his family. After the assembly executed them, they burned them with fire to remove the spiritual impurity.

Obviously church discipline in the New Testament is different: its harshest form involves exclusion from the community, but not physical execution, and the excluded person is welcomed back if they repent. As for spiritual impurity, Jesus showed repeatedly that holiness can remove impurity, rather than the reverse (e.g., Mark 1:41; 2:16-17; 5:30; Matt 11:19//Luke 7:34), a reality that continues among those in whom Christ lives. Of course, that does not permit voluntary participation in things associated with idolatry or evil spirits (1 Cor 10:20-21).

Yet God struck dead Ananias and Sapphira, presumably for the same reason that he struck dead Aaron’s two sons who offered strange fire on the altar (Lev 10:1-2) or Uzzah who, probably more innocently, touched the ark to steady it (2 Sam 6:6-7; 1 Chron 13:9-10). (It is not only readers today who are unhappy about this; David was upset about Uzzah [2 Sam 6:8; 1 Chron 13:11], and Aaron was naturally upset about his sons [Lev 10:16-20]. One of his grandsons, Phinehas, afterward proved quite zealous for holiness [Num 25:7, 11].) God’s holiness is not to be trifled with.

Now, God striking people dead is not common in the Old Testament, and it is even rarer in the New Testament. This is the only example in the Gospels and Acts, where God’s character is regularly revealed in Jesus as he compassionately heals the sick and delivers those who are demonized. But it still has something to teach us, especially when we pray for revival. In deeper intensity with the Spirit, we become more aware of God’s holiness, and more aware of what it means to be consecrated to him. We desire to honor his holiness, to draw deeper in his presence. Just as poison is bad for the body, some things are spiritually toxic for our personal or communal spiritual welfare. A life or community sensitive to God’s holiness will be allergic to spiritual toxins.

Ananias’s and Sapphira’s death struck fear into the hearts of everyone, even the Christians (Acts 5:11). As a result of this and other signs, people were scared to join the movement unless they were really serious about following Christ—no fake devotion was welcome (5:13). No nominal Christians in that setting! But because Jesus’s movement was pure and without hypocrisy, more people ended up joining the movement in the long run (5:14).

May we desire ever deeper holiness, and may those around us be drawn to such holiness. That comes not by legalism—that’s just fake holiness. It comes by the Spirit, who reveals to us the holy and awesome God, maker of heaven and earth, who has graciously chosen to dwell among us.