Posted on

True Purification—Matthew 15:1-31

Mere religious tradition can blind us to what really matters to God. Those whose honor derives from their religious or social status can resent those who speak truth. But Jesus transcends all boundaries and reaches out to all people. He shows true power to transform that mere religious rituals cannot.

Jerusalem was the dominant city in the region of Judea and Galilee. Jerusalem therefore had the largest concentration of scribes, or teachers of the law, and Pharisees, known for their meticulous concern with biblical laws and Pharisaic traditions. Some of these scribes and Pharisees noticed that Jesus’s disciples did not ceremonially wash their hands before a meal. Because teachers were considered responsible for their disciples’ behavior, these religious leaders challenge Jesus concerning why he allowed this breach of traditional purity (Matt 15:1-2). Their concern was not one of hygiene (which is a valuable thing) but one of ritual purity. (Unlike Mark, who writes mainly for Gentiles, Matthew does not need to explain this custom, which was common among Jews even far away in the Greek world.)

Jesus responds, however, by highlighting the inconsistent values in their religious traditions. Customs are not necessarily evil, and sometimes they can be helpful in avoiding needless offense (cf. 17:24-27); but they must never be allowed to take priority in our lives over biblical principles. Scripture demanded honoring parents (see especially Exod 20:12), which naturally included providing for aged parents (Matt 15:4). Pharisees would have agreed with Jesus on this point. Yet Jesus explains that they value secondary rules in the name of religion so highly that they could ignore someone using religion as an excuse to dishonor parents (15:5-6). They were inconsistent to value human traditions to this extent, because in so doing they valued them above what Scripture, God’s own Word, said (15:3, 6). Thus they were hypocrites, just like those whom the biblical prophets condemned (15:8-9).

The real issue here, Jesus points out, is not hand washing, but condemning others based on merely human rules, while ignoring what God has already explained matters most to him. Scripture reveals God’s heart; it shows God more concerned about love and justice for others (cf. 22:35-40; 23:23) than about mere rituals, especially rituals not even mentioned in the Bible! Because Jesus honors Scripture highly, as “God’s word” (15:6), we should do the same, evaluating our rules by its standards. Scripture’s central ethical concerns have to do not with rituals but with how we treat others. (See the sample prohibitions in 15:19, four or five of the six from Exod 20:13-16, the same passage as Exod 20:12 used above; compare also four of the issues in Matt 5:21-48.)

Jesus’s public reproof of the religious leaders worries the disciples; it seems imprudent to offend society’s powerful (15:12)! Jesus, however, has simply responded to the religious leaders’ criticisms of others; Jesus has been defending his disciples. He explains that the future does not lie with these apparently powerful people; God’s kingdom is about what God establishes, not about what people accomplish by their own religious ideas (15:13-14). The truly wise are not those who come up with their own ideas about God; indeed, even the disciples Jesus had chosen were not always the most intellectually proficient (15:15-16). True wisdom means recognizing that God is by far the wisest of all, and therefore we should accept God’s Word. Divine truth is what God has revealed about himself rather than human guesses about him (cf. 16:17).

Far more offensive than the impurity of unwashed hands, however, was the supposed impurity of the sorts of people that Jewish people deemed impure—Gentiles (15:21-28). Jesus takes his disciples into a Gentile region, and a woman there begs him to deliver her daughter from a demon (15:21-22). In Mark 7:26, Mark calls the woman a Syrophoenician Greek; this means that she belonged to the ruling class of Greeks who now controlled the Gentile cities to the north of Galilee. Many of the common people of this region, however, were descended from the Canaanites displaced by Israel’s earlier conquest. Matthew thus calls her a “Canaanite” (Matt 15:22; cf. two Canaanite women in 1:3, 5)—whom his Jewish contemporaries might view as the most impure among the impure Gentiles! Jesus’s disciples, who like some believers today shared the values of their culture, certainly did not want her around (15:23).

Because Jesus’s initial mission was only to Israel (15:24), Jesus initially puts this woman off in 15:26. Her class might have considered such behavior shocking. This woman belonged to the urban ruling class that heavily taxed the countryside, so that many poor people’s children went hungry at times. Now Jesus was putting “the children’s bread” first, and she, a member of the ruling class, was the outsider! “It is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to dogs,” he warned. Jewish people considered dogs unclean, Gentiles used “Dog!” as an insult, and even a mere comparison with dogs (as is the case here) could be offensive if someone chose to take it that way.

This woman, however, does not try to maintain her dignity or rank; nor does she maintain ethnic prejudice against the Jewish descendants of the Canaanites’ ancient enemies. Instead, she desperately refuses to give up her daughter’s cause, and humbles herself. She, a Gentile, had already recognized Jesus as Son of David—the rightful king of Israel (15:22). (This is before Peter confesses Jesus as the Christ in 16:16!) Now she is ready to accept her subordinate position beneath him and his people. “Even the dogs eat the crumbs dropped from their lord’s table!” she pleads (15:27). In her Greek culture, dogs could also be household pets; they could eat scraps from the table. In other words, she does not need a big expression of his power; even a little bit is enough to deliver her daughter. Like the Gentile centurion speaking on behalf of his servant, she recognizes that he has more than enough power that even a little will be sufficient (8:8)!

Even though it was not yet time for the mission to the Gentiles (though it soon will be, 28:19), Jesus grants the woman’s request and delivers her daughter (15:28). As he did with the centurion (8:10), so here he commends this Gentile’s faith (15:28). She has expressed faith by recognizing that Jesus is her only hope, and by accepting whatever conditions he might place on her as a sign of his rulership. Jesus responds by setting aside a rule not yet universally abolished so he could respond to her heart. Now it becomes clear, even in advance of the Gentile mission in 28:19, that Gentiles can be delivered by faith, and the impure can be made pure. The greatest purity is not the purity of ritual, but the purity of the heart in Christ (15:11, 17-20). Ultimately, Christ transcends all ethnic and class barriers for those who trust in him, for us who recognize that he alone is our hope.

Jesus goes on to heal the broken (15:30-31) and feed the hungry (15:32-38). He does not depend on the approval of the powerful or the favor of the influential (cf. 15:7, 12), nice as those may have been. Instead he reaches out to the powerless. Ultimately this course will lead to the displeasure of the powerful people (such as some of the aristocratic priests) who exploited the powerless, and would lead Jesus to the cross. The gospel is realistic, warning us that there is a price for meeting desperate needs more than seeking worldly power. Yet Jesus, like the woman in this story, had faith: he depended on the Father alone, and gave his life knowing that the Father would raise him up.

–Craig Keener is professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary and author of The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (revised edition, InterVarsity, 2014).

Posted on

God uses weak people—Exodus 6:10-30

Have you ever wondered if God could use someone like you? People in the Bible often wondered that also.

One person who wondered that was Moses. He wondered on multiple occasions; here we focus on one such context in which Exodus recounts his wondering. Most preachers do not preach from genealogies; most individual genealogies were probably not designed for preaching anyway. But one must ask why God suddenly interrupts the story of Moses with a genealogy in Exodus 6:14-25. God commands Moses to tell Pharaoh to release his people, but Moses protests that his own people have not heeded him, so how would Pharaoh listen to him (6:10-13)? After the genealogy, the narrative repeats the point: God commands Moses to confront Pharaoh, and Moses protests that Pharaoh will not listen to him.

What is the point of interrupting this narrative with a genealogy? The genealogy itself lists three tribes, the three oldest tribes, which sages who remembered the story might have called out until getting to Moses’ tribe. But the fact that the genealogy occurs at this point in the narrative may tell us more than just that someone decided to recite the genealogy in order until they reached Moses’s ancestors.

The list reminds us that Moses was descended from Levi, and related to Reuben and Simeon. Reuben slept with his father’s concubine; Simeon and Levi massacred all the men in Shechem. By placing the genealogy here, Exodus may be commenting on why Moses was so uncomfortable with confronting Pharaoh. If he was descended from such people as Levi, Reuben and Simeon, is it any wonder that Moses would have problems?

With the exception of Jesus, all the people God chose in the Bible were people with weaknesses rather than those who might think they “deserved” to be called. God chose broken people whose triumphs would bring glory to him rather than to themselves. If you trust God with your life, he can use your life to bring him honor also.

Posted on

Who really speaks for God?—1 Thessalonians 5:21

Paul closes his first letter to the Thessalonians with a series of exhortations. Paul no doubt designed these exhortations particularly for the believers in Thessalonica, but they relevant for us today also. (Ancient writers sometimes listed a series of exhortations; in this case, Paul is adding some concise advice after finishing the main part of his letter.) I will focus especially on Paul’s exhortations concerning prophecy, in their wider ancient Christian context, but many of these principles also apply when we evaluate teachings.

Paul’s exhortations in 1 Thessalonians 5:12-22

Paul’s closing exhortations include supporting and heeding God’s workers among them (5:12-13a), remaining in unity (5:13b), giving each member of the body what they need (admonition, encouragement, or help, 5:14) and being patient and kind with everyone (5:14b-15).

Paul then lists a trio of exhortations related to a worshipful heart: always rejoice, continue in prayer, and give thanks in every situation (5:16-18). Such an approach to life demonstrates faith in God who guides our lives. Of course, these are general summaries, not meaning that a person is never sad. Elsewhere Paul does value grieving with those who grieve (Rom 12:15) and himself grieves whenever he thinks of the fallen state of his people (Rom 9:2-3). He feared for a friend’s safety (2 Cor 7:5) and was deeply concerned for the churches (2 Cor 11:28-29; 1 Thess 3:5). Nevertheless, joy is characteristic of life in the Spirit (Gal 5:22) and of much worship (e.g., Ps 9:2; 27:6; 32:11; 33:3).

Then Paul turns to what might be another trio of exhortations, the third of which might raise two related issues. We must not “quench” the Spirit (1 Thess 5:19); we must not despise prophecies (5:20); we must evaluate them (5:21), embracing what is good and rejecting what is evil (5:21-22).

The verb that Paul uses to warn against “quenching” the Spirit originally (and usually still) referred to putting out a fire. This suggests to us that the Spirit sometimes moves God’s people in astonishingly dramatic ways; even more clearly, it warns us that our resistance can hinder the Spirit’s work. We can do this in ways such as preferring our old patterns of doing things to what God is now doing, or by deliberate disobedience.

Discerning prophecies (1 Thess 5:20-22)

The next exhortation likely suggests one of the Spirit’s key ways of working: “Do not despise prophecies” (5:20). As we see in 1 Corinthians 14 and in light of the Old Testament, God moved some of those listening to him to deliver his message to others. Whereas this may have sometimes been practiced in small groups of prophets in the Old Testament (e.g., 1 Sam 10:5-6, 10), God had now poured out the prophetic Spirit so widely starting at Pentecost (Acts 2:17-18) that such prophecy was widespread among the early churches (compare 1 Cor 14:1, 5, 26-31).

The verb translated “despise” implies contemptuously looking down on something as being too insignificant, or beneath one’s dignity, to consider. The Old Testament and Jewish tradition often associated the Spirit with prophetic inspiration, so “quenching the Spirit” (1 Thess 5:19) may be expressed here especially by demeaning prophecy (5:20). Probably the Thessalonian Christians were not the only ones tempted to ignore prophecies; Paul warns the Corinthian Christians to zealously seek to prophesy, as well as not to forbid tongues (1 Cor 14:39). (See further http://wp.me/p1MUNd-l9.)

Nevertheless, not all prophecies or messages supposedly from God really were (cf. 2 Thess 2:2). Moreover, we may hear something from God yet fallibly misunderstand and/or miscommunicate it: we know and prophesy only in part (1 Cor 13:9; cf. 2 Kgs 2:3, 5, 15-16; Matt 11:3; Acts 21:4).

One must therefore “test all things” (1 Thess 5:21). Paul elsewhere speaks of evaluating everything, so we may discern God’s will (Rom 12:2; Phil 1:9-10); he urges us to evaluate especially ourselves (1 Cor 11:28; 2 Cor 13:5; Gal 6:4). He also exhorts prophets in local congregations to corporately evaluate the prophecies they have given (1 Cor 14:29), and may speak of a special gift of such discernment (12:10).

Having evaluated messages, we should embrace what is good and reject what is evil (5:21-22). These final warnings may apply specifically to prophecy. But even if these last two warnings are more general rather than referring specifically to prophecy, in this context the principle would certainly apply to prophecy also.

Often in the Old Testament, senior prophets such as Samuel or Elijah and Elisha mentored groups of younger prophets, helping them grow in discernment (cf. 1 Sam 19:20; 2 Kgs 4:38; 6:1-3). Here, however, Paul addresses a congregation of believers that is only several years old; the “safety net” for prophecy in this case thus involves not the discernment of senior prophets but rather a sort of peer review. Here those most sensitive to the Spirit’s voice listen together for God’s leading (1 Cor 14:29). The corporate hearing of all the churches was also valuable (1 Cor 14:36). Paul could function in the senior prophet role himself (14:37-38), but was not with them to supervise everything, and sometimes these young believers needed correction. Today we still need to practice discernment about whatever message claims to be from God, whether it is with prophecies or teachings.

Discerning prophets in Scripture

First John, concerned about false teachers who have left the community of believers, warns that believers must “test” the spirits to discern false prophets (1 John 4:1). Whereas Paul’s instructions to churches required evaluating genuine believers’ prophecies, this passage addresses full-fledged false prophets from the spirit of “antichrist” (4:1-6). First John offers various means of discernment, both doctrinal (Jesus is the Christ, 2:22-23; Jesus Christ has come in the flesh, 4:2-3; Jesus is God’s Son, 4:15; fidelity to the apostolic witness to Jesus, 4:5-6) and moral (continued fellowship with God’s people, 2:19; keeping his commandments [2:3-6], especially by loving other believers, 2:9-11; 3:10; 4:7-8, 20). Articulating the right view about Christ and faithfully loving one another are both signs of being true followers of Christ; wrong views about Christ, or failure to truly love one’s fellow believers, are signs of a false prophet.

Of course, John was addressing a specific situation. We also read of false prophets who deliberately make up falsehoods to exploit God’s people financially or sexually (2 Pet 2:1-3). Others prophesy in Jesus’s name, apparently believing in what they are doing (Matt 7:22), but are damned because they do not bear the good fruit of obedience to Jesus’s teachings (7:16-23). A person can even prophesy genuinely by the Spirit and yet not be a godly person, simply moved because the Spirit is strong in the ministry setting where they find themselves (1 Sam 19:20-24). What matters most before God—and how we will know who is from God—is not a person’s gifts but his or her fruit.

A very early Christian document that is not in the New Testament gives even more detailed advice. Chapter 11 of the Didache urges Christians to initially welcome visiting apostles and prophets. If, however, an alleged apostle or prophet does not live by the Lord’s ways, for example by seeking for money or gifts for oneself, that person is a false prophet.

Ultimately, in distinguishing a true message from God from a false one (or at least one distorted by human misinterpretation), any given message must be evaluated by a larger context of what God has said. God’s word did not start with any of us nor come to us alone (1 Cor 14:36). God will not contradict what he has already spoken, so everything may be safely tested by Scripture. Further, as noted above, others who listen to God should also be able to recognize whether something is truly from God or not.

Discerning messages today

Because not everyone understands Scripture the same way, careful interpretation is important (see e.g., http://www.craigkeener.org/why-it-is-important-to-study-the-bible-in-context/; “The Bible in its Context” free at http://www.craigkeener.org/free-resources/).

A difficulty sometimes harder to resolve by “objective” means is how we recognize who else is truly listening to the Spirit to help evaluate messages. In settings where falsehood has become widespread, the true prophetic voice may be in the minority whereas those who all speak the same message may be false prophets (1 Kgs 22:6-25; Jer 5:13, 31; 14:13-15; 20:6; 23:9-31; 26:7-8, 11, 16; 27:9, 14-18; 28; 29:8, 31; 32:32; 37:19; Ezek 13:2-9). Nevertheless, even here the true prophetic voice stands in continuity with earlier prophetic voices (Jer 7:25; 25:4; 26:5; 28:8; 29:19; 35:15).

Even though some regarded prophecies of judgment against God’s people as blasphemous (Jer 26:11), the burden of proof rested with those who told people what they wanted to hear (28:8-9). “Prophets” can get popular telling people what they want to hear, such as that judgment is not coming (Jer 6:13-14; 8:10-11; 14:13-16; Ezek 13:16; Mic 3:5), or that God does not mind their sexual behavior or popular idolatry (Jude 4; Rev 2:14, 20).

To give an example, a few decades ago prosperity teacher Charles Capps declared that judgment would not come on America, since it had 100 million Christians who spoke in tongues. During the same period, Pentecostal preacher David Wilkerson was warning that judgment was coming on the United States. Which one was more accurately hearing what the Spirit was saying?

Certainly we know what people in the United States want to hear and want they do not want to hear, whether it comes from the political right or the political left. People were incensed when Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, from the political right, pronounced judgment on the United States for sexual sin; people were no less incensed when Jeremiah Wright, President Obama’s former pastor, pronounced judgment on this country for exploiting others. One reason for the public outcry in both cases was that the speakers apparently pronounced judgment after the fact (even if they had also been doing it beforehand); another may have been that it was felt insensitive to the many innocent people who suffered when the tragic events came.

Nevertheless, it also seems clear that it is easier to become popular by preaching what satisfies people’s “itching ears” (2 Tim 4:3). Is it possible that preachers who promote extravagance, or preach a god who does not care about injustice, or promise that believers will not suffer, and so forth, gain followers by satisfying what people want to hear? Is it possible that God’s heart is grieved, as in Jeremiah’s day, by the proliferation of false messages in his name?

Posted on

Are spiritual gifts for today?

Paul declares that we are the body of Christ with many members (Rom 12:4-5; 1 Cor 12:12, 20). He then elaborates on some of the varied gifts God has graciously given us to serve the rest of Christ’s body. Because Paul is simply offering samples, he provides several different lists that include a variety of ministries. These gifts for helping the other members in Christ’s body include such diverse ministries as giving, teaching, prophesying, speaking wisely, healings, worship leading, and evangelism (Rom 12:6-8; 1 Cor 12:8-10, 28-30; 14:26; Eph 4:11).

Paul nowhere distinguishes between what we might call supernatural and potentially natural gifts. That is, we need God’s grace to teach God’s word just as we need God’s grace to prophesy it. Like the churches that Paul first addressed, we remain the body of Christ in need of all our members and all our gifts; otherwise we will be like a body with important parts (such as hands or eyes) missing (1 Cor 12:14-30).

Nevertheless, some modern Western interpreters have traditionally affirmed so-called natural gifts while denying that supernatural gifts such as prophecy remain. Not only is there no support for this distinction in the biblical text, but Paul’s lists and teaching about gifts undercut it. Indeed, Paul emphasizes the need for various gifts, including prophecy, to bring Christ’s body to maturity and unity in trusting and knowing Christ (Eph 4:11-13)—a need that Christ’s body still has today. (I must pause to note here that Paul presumably uses the term “apostles” here, as he normally does elsewhere, to refer to a group of ministers larger than the Twelve original witnesses for Jesus. Virtually no one suggests that we still have original witnesses of Jesus among us; cf. Rom 16:7; 1 Cor 15:5-7; Gal 1:19; 1 Thess 2:6.)

One gift in nearly all of Paul’s lists, which Paul often ranks toward the top, is the gift of prophecy (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11). In the Old Testament, it was the most commonly mentioned ministry for communicating God’s message; it remains prominent in the New Testament as well. Paul not only emphasizes that this gift is particularly valuable for building up Christ’s body (1 Cor 14:3-4), he urges believers to seek it (14:1, 39; cf. 12:31). Thus, even if we did not know of true prophecies today, obeying biblical teaching would lead us to pray for God to give this gift to the body of Christ. Prophesying sometimes includes exposing the secrets of unbelievers’ hearts by God’s Spirit (14:24-25); at least in principle, the gift is widely available (14:5, 24, 31), though not all have it (12:29) and not all have it in the same degree (Rom 12:6).

Those who object to gifts such as prophecy continuing today often argue that allowing for contemporary prophecy would diminish the unique authority of Scripture. But this argument itself is an extrabiblical approach that differs from what we find in Scripture. Both in the Old and New Testaments, we read of many prophets whose prophecies were not recorded in Scripture (e.g., 1 Kgs 18:13; 1 Cor 14:29, 31). Scripture does not include all true prophecies; Scripture moreover includes history and other genres that are not prophecies.

I am not suggesting that God is revealing new doctrines—new doctrine is quite different from saying that God speaks to us at times to guide and nurture us. We already have in Christ’s first coming the fullest revelation of God that we will receive until his return (Heb 1:1-2), although the Spirit continues to teach us (John 14:26; 16:12-14; 1 John 2:27). One reason people object to gifts like prophecy continuing is that they fear that this opens the door for unbiblical doctrines. True prophecy need not do this. Yet the doctrine that the gifts have ceased is itself a postbiblical doctrine, without genuine biblical support.

Gifts like prophecy are pervasive in Scripture, and nowhere does Scripture suggest that they will become obsolete before the Lord’s return. Some cite 1 Cor 13:8-10 against continuing gifts, but the text in fact teaches the opposite. Paul provides three examples of gifts: prophecy, tongues, and knowledge. Given how “knowledge” is used elsewhere in 1 Corinthians (versus some modern ideas about what it means; cf. 1:5; 8:1; 14:6), “knowledge” here probably means knowledge about God of the limited sort presently available, often through teaching. Both this sort of knowledge and prophetic messages are limited, as opposed to the full knowledge we will have when we see the Lord face to face (13:11). This expression cannot simply refer to the close of the canon at the end of the first century. Knowledge has not passed away, nor have we yet seen Jesus face to face, without limitation.

Nor is Paul alone in expecting continuing gifts. When Jesus poured out his Spirit at Pentecost, Peter explained that this fulfilled Joel’s prophecy: God would pour out his Spirit in the last days, and this outpouring would be characterized by visions, dreams, and prophecy (Acts 2:17-18). God did not pour out his Spirit then pour his Spirit back. Moreover, if it was “the last days” when Peter spoke, it surely remains the last days. Not every individual in Acts exhibited the same gifts or ministries, but Acts does teach us about God’s work in the era between Jesus’s first and second comings.

Educated leaders such as Stephen, Paul and Apollos spread Jesus’s message by debating in public intellectual forums such as synagogues and courts. The most common means of drawing attention for the gospel in Acts, however, is signs, which God performed through both some of the educated and some who were not (e.g., Acts 2:43; 5:12; 6:8; 8:6; 19:11-12). After a dramatic healing in the temple, Jerusalem’s authorities tried to intimidate Peter and John against speaking in Jesus’s name. Instead, believers prayed that the Lord would continue to embolden them, granting further signs and wonders (4:29-30). God gave signs to attest the message about his grace (14:3), which we still preach.

When preaching about God’s reign (his “kingdom”), Jesus also demonstrated God’s reign by authoritatively healing the sick and delivering those oppressed by spirits (e.g., Matt 4:23-24; 9:35; 12:28; Luke 9:11; 11:20). Jesus commissioned disciples to do the same (Matt 10:7-8; Luke 9:2; 10:9); the principles of this mission continue until the end (Matt 10:23). God used dramatic signs especially to draw outsiders’ attention to the gospel (cf. Rom 15:19), but gifts of healings are also provided to help believers (1 Cor 12:9; James 5:14-16). Such healings need not be dramatic to fulfill their purpose; healing through medical means, for example, is no less an answer to prayer. But again there is no indication that healings would stop; they continue, including as a witness to outsiders, as late as the end of Acts (Acts 28:8-9) and other signs appear in Revelation (Rev 11:5-6, interpreted in various ways but rarely applied exclusively to the past).

Why would God work one way throughout Scripture in various times and places and then suddenly stop, without prior warning, at the end of the first century? Is it not more biblical to expect that God continues to work as he did in the Bible, in various times and places as he deems best and his people welcome his work?

In fact, God has continued to work with miracles, prophecies, tongues and other gifts throughout history. (Even most Christians who deny that the gifts are for today do affirm that miracles continue at least sometimes. God is sovereign and certainly able to perform miracles and answer prayers.) Irenaeus in the second century testified to virtually the same range of miracles we read in Acts. Historians have documented that the leading causes of conversion to Christianity in the 300s were healings and exorcisms. Augustine originally believed that miracles had largely died out by his day but ultimately confirmed that many were occurring even in his own circle of churches and among friends. Miracles accompanied many new mission fields as well as some revivals. Wesley and early Methodists reported some. Nineteenth-century Lutheran pastor Johann Christoph Blumhardt reported many. Today some suggest that up to 80 percent of the church’s global growth is connected with signs and wonders.

Of course, discernment is crucial, because not every claimed prophecy or miracle is genuinely from God’s Spirit (cf. 1 John 4:1-6). Even though some are too critical, they rightly remind us that we must not only welcome but also evaluate what claims to be the work of the Spirit (1 Cor 14:29). We should not despise prophecies but we should evaluate them and embrace only what is true (1 Thess 5:19-22). (I pause to mention here that two or three Christian Union staff prophesied to me and they were accurate.) Unfortunately, some who affirm gifts denigrate the intellect; some circulate unsound teachings such as self-centered prosperity; and so on. Then again, unsound teachings also circulate in circles that deny the gifts. We should neither throw out the baby out with the bath water nor let it drown there.

Paul urges us to seek spiritual gifts, especially those that serve the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:31; 14:1, 12, 26, 39).

For other posts about spiritual gifts continuing, see http://wp.me/p1MUNd-e1; http://wp.me/p1MUNd-1p; also reviews at http://pneumareview.com/john-macarthurs-strange-fire-reviewed-by-craig-s-keener/; http://pneumareview.com/rtkendall-holy-fire-ckeener/

For other posts about spiritual gifts in general, see http://wp.me/p1MUNd-4Q (The purpose of spiritual gifts)

For other posts about the Spirit and life in the Spirit, see http://wp.me/p1MUNd-eN (The fruit of the Spirit — Galatians 5:22-23); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-3N (How can we hear the Holy Spirit accurately?); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-fD (In God’s presence—John 14—16); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-fq (As the Father sent me, I send you—John 20:21); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-fO (“The down payment”); and other posts in the file marked “Holy Spirit”
For Craig’s video lectures about the Spirit, see (for short ones): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U2sk-POYC4 (Pentecost); http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdcwx18dIWw (Water Imagery in the Gospel of John)
For a longer one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9FzsR6rY6w (Luke’s Theology of Mission in Acts)

Posted on

The Spirit-baptized life: a model–Mark 1:8-13

What does the Spirit-baptized life look like? Jesus is the model, and Mark presents him as such in his opening verses.

The Gospel of Mark mentions God’s Spirit explicitly only six times, but half of them appear in Mark’s introduction (1:8-13), where he introduces some of his central themes. (That is what ancient introductions often did.) Mark’s other uses emphasize the Spirit’s work in empowering Jesus for exorcism (Mk 3:29-30), Old Testament prophets to speak God’s message (12:26) or Jesus’ witnesses to speak his message (13:11).

In the introduction, John the Baptist announces the mighty one who will baptize others in the Holy Spirit (1:8); this Spirit-baptizer is Jesus of Nazareth. Immediately after this announcement, we see Jesus baptized and the Spirit coming on him (1:9-10). The Spirit-baptizer thus gives us a model of what the Spirit-baptized life will look like, for he himself receives the Spirit first. That is why what the Spirit does next appears all the more stunning: the Spirit thrusts Jesus into the wilderness for conflict with the devil (1:12-13). The Spirit-filled life is not a life of ease and comfort, but of conflict with the devil’s forces!

The rest of the Gospel of Mark continues this pattern. Shortly after Jesus emerges from the wilderness, he must confront an evil spirit in a religious gathering (1:21-27). Throughout the rest of the Gospel, Jesus continues to defeat the devil by healing the sick and driving out demons (cf. 3:27), while the devil continues to strike at Jesus through the devil’s religious and political agents. In the end, the devil manages to get Jesus killed–but Jesus triumphs by rising from the dead.

In the same way, Jesus expects his disciples to heal the sick and drive out demons (3:14-15; 4:40; 6:13; 9:19, 28-29; 11:22-24), and also to join him in suffering (8:34-38; 10:29-31, 38-40; 13:9-13). His disciples seemed more happy to share his triumphs than his sufferings, but the Gospel of Mark emphasizes that we cannot share his glory without also sharing his suffering. That lesson remains as relevant for modern disciples as for ancient ones!

Of course, Jesus is different from us. In light of the Old Testament, where only God can pour out God’s Spirit, Jesus’s role of Spirit-baptizer identifies him as divine. That is why John the Baptist feels himself unworthy to carry even his sandals—to take the posture of a servant–though the Old Testament prophets were called “servants of the Lord.” Nevertheless, Jesus also identifies with us fully in our humanity, and Mark shows that he depended on the Spirit’s power. Jesus both empowers us and shows us what a Spirit-empowered life can look like.

–For other posts about the Spirit and life in the Spirit, see http://wp.me/p1MUNd-eN (The fruit of the Spirit — Galatians 5:22-23); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-3N (How can we hear the Holy Spirit accurately?); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-fD (In God’s presence—John 14—16); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-fq (As the Father sent me, I send you—John 20:21); http://wp.me/p1MUNd-fO (“The down payment”); and other posts in the file marked “Holy Spirit”
For Craig’s video lectures about the Spirit, see (for short ones): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2U2sk-POYC4 (Pentecost); http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdcwx18dIWw (Water Imagery in the Gospel of John)
For a longer one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9FzsR6rY6w (Luke’s Theology of Mission in Acts)

Posted on

Grafted into the heritage of God’s people–Romans 11

The publisher has graciously given permission to post my article on Romans from the multi-authored, popular-level book UNITY: Awakening the One New Man, which especially addresses the unity of Jewish and Gentile believers in Jesus. Feel free click on the link to read my chapter on Romans, which addresses how Gentile followers of Jesus have been grafted into the heritage of God’s people and also how they are called to honor the Jewish people.

Link: http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?ca=2026c32b-68b6-4e17-a887-ca18a0420b68&c=c40802f0-2987-11e3-b570-d4ae529a848a&ch=c443fa80-2987-11e3-b5a5-d4ae529a848a

Posted on

Contemporary Christian worship?—Exodus 25

What matters about worship is whom it addresses: the true God. As far as music styles or other features, they often fit the culture addressed. The musical instruments used in Psalm 150:3-5, for example, were also used by Canaanites in their worship. The Israelites used all these same instruments, but the difference was that they worshiped the true and the living God rather than statues.

The same is true for the design of the tabernacle in Exodus. Egyptians built temples differently than Mesopotamians. If one wanted to get to the innermost shrine in a Mesopotamian temple, one might have to go this way and that; in Egyptian temples, the holiest shrine, or holy of holies, was in a line directly from the front entrance, in the furthest rear. The tabernacle looks like the Egyptian model.

Because the Israelites had been slaves in Egypt used in building projects, they knew what Egyptian temples looked like. They would have known about portable tent-shrines used in Egypt and Midian, as well as about the structure of Egyptian temples (and palaces), with an outer court, inner court, and the innermost shrine, which was the holiest place. God chose a design with which the Israelites were familiar so they could understand that the tabernacle they carried through the wilderness was a temple.

Some aspects of the tabernacle parallel other temples, and the parallels communicate true theology about God. In the tabernacle, the most expensive materials were used nearest the ark of the covenant: gold was more expensive than copper, and blue dye than red dye. These details reflect an ancient Near Eastern practice: people used the most expensive materials nearest the innermost sanctuary to signify that their god should be approached with awe and reverence. The tabernacle uses standard ancient Near Eastern symbols to communicate its point about God’s holiness.

Some aspects of the tabernace include both parallels and contrasts, which also communicate theology about God. For instance, some of the furniture of the Tabernacle resembles the furniture of other ancient temples: a table of offerings, an altar, and so forth. Various sacrifices, such as sin offerings and thank offerings, were also used by other cultures, as were purity rules.

But Canaanite, Egyptian and Hittite temples included other features not found in the tabernacle, such as a chest of drawers and bed. Priests would wake their idols in the morning, give them their morning toilet, entertain them with dancing girls, feed them, and eventually put them back to bed at night. There was none of this in the Lord’s temple, for he was not merely an idol dependent on his priests to assist him. Unlike the gods of these peoples’ myths, the God of Israel neither slumbers nor sleeps (Ps 121:3-4).

Some features of the tabernacle contrast starkly with their culture, and in light of the other parallels, these contrasts are all the more obvious. The climax of other ancient Near Eastern and northern African temples was the image of the deity, enthroned on its sacred pedestal in the holiest innermost sanctuary. But there is no image in God’s temple, because he would allow no graven images of himself (Exod 20:4).

Further, many massive Egyptian temples included shrines for tutelary deities flanking the inner sanctuary; but there are no other deities associated with the Lord’s tabernacle, for he would tolerate the worship of no other gods in his sight (Exod 20:3). God communicated his theology to Israel even in the architecture of the tabernacle, and he did so in cultural terms they could understand. (Some of the modern interpretations of the colors and design of the tabernacle are simply guesses that have become widely circulated. The suggestions we offer here represent instead careful research into the way temples were designed in Moses’s day.)

God identified with various elements of local cultures and used them to communicate with people in language that they understood. Where there could be no compromise, however, was in the character of the object of worship, the one true God. As we worship God with all our diverse cultural styles of worship, we need to keep that in mind. We do not need to debate one another over music styles or other features. What we do need to remember is that our true God is holy, to be approached with awe and reverence, with joy and celebration. Let us magnify the name of the Lord!

Posted on

Biblical theology: putting together the results of Bible study

Sometimes today readers start with our specific doctrinal assumptions and read them into the Bible. One danger with this method is that it keeps us from ever learning anything new. If we read the Bible only as a textbook of what we already believe, we are likely to miss anything it has to teach and correct us.

Another danger is that it makes our doctrine the “canon” rather than Scripture. Then when we talk with fellow believers from different denominations, we each insist on our view and cannot really dialogue, because we are not willing to start with the Bible itself. Then the loudest voice “wins”! It is therefore very important to learn the Bible’s perspectives the way they are written.

But this does not mean that we do not care about what the Bible teaches about various matters (i.e., its doctrine). It just means that we try to listen carefully to what each passage in its context is saying before we try to put the various points together. (Christians will disagree most on how we put the points together, and that is where we need to be most charitable with one another.)

Some books of the Bible emphasize some themes more than other books do. Thus, for example, if one reads the Book of Revelation, one is more likely to find an emphasis on Jesus’ second coming than in the Gospel of John; in the Gospel of John, by contrast, there is a heavier emphasis on eternal life available in the present. In the same way, when Paul writes to the Corinthians about speaking in tongues, he emphasizes its use as prayer. By contrast, when Luke describes tongues in Acts, it functions as a demonstration that God transcends all linguistic barriers, fitting Luke’s theme that the Spirit empowers God’s people to cross cultural barriers.

Different writers and books often have different emphases; these differences need not contradict one another, but we must study them respectfully on their own terms before we try to put them together. When we do put them together, we often find that the fuller perspective is bigger than any one picture we originally assumed.

When a specific passage seems obscure to us and we cannot tell which way the author meant it, it often helps to look at the rest of the book to see what the author emphasizes. Thus, for example, the fact that the Gospel of John so often stresses that future hopes like “eternal life” are present realities (e.g., John 3:16, 36; 5:24-25; 11:24-26) may help shed light on how we approach John 14:2-3. At the same time, we should never forget that each New Testament writing, however distinctive, is also part of a larger context of the teaching of apostolic Christianity, which had some common features. Thus, though the Gospel of John emphasizes the presence of the future, it in no way minimizes the fact that Jesus will return someday future as well (5:28-29; 6:39-40).

In this blog, I usually focus on particular passages, often in light of the context of the book of the Bible in which a passage occurs. But of course I take for granted that when we build our lives on Scripture, we want to build our lives on the whole of Scripture, finding the ways it fits together best, especially in light of the fullest revelation in Jesus’s incarnate mission, death and resurrection. Although they are usually taught as separate disciplines, theology and Bible study are not opposed to each other. But to hear the theology of Scripture, we need to approach it in the right way, hearing the distinctive voice of each part of Scripture.

Posted on

Divine Action presentation at Oxford—video

At a conference on special divine action in July, Craig gave a plenary paper concerning miracle reports for the Ian Ramsey Centre for Science and Religion at Oxford University. Lenn Goodman, professor of philosophy at Vanderbilt (and a friend with whom Craig has been privileged to share Shabbat and attend synagogue), introduced Craig’s paper; Western Michigan University philosophy professor Timothy McGrew gave the response, followed by some give-and-take academic discussion with scholars in the audience: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYBnJF2P_WQ&list=UUcw1IwzRhh9jJtGwF3X-CQg.
The historical context of modern skepticism about miracles is an important element alongside what Craig addressed (and may be even more interesting, though this website is mainly for Craig’s research): note the paper by Alister McGrath, professor of science and religion at Oxford, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXqhB_RqEzI&list=UUcw1IwzRhh9jJtGwF3X-CQg; also Tim McGrew, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMjg86wlGU0&list=UUcw1IwzRhh9jJtGwF3X-CQg (the shortest of these videos, for those in a hurry). Some of you may also be interested in the other papers, including Graham Twelftree (to whom Craig responded briefly in the same video; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AJfNBuOIpY&list=UUcw1IwzRhh9jJtGwF3X-CQg); Oxford philosophy professor Richard Swinburne (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUnMqtymfoU&list=UUcw1IwzRhh9jJtGwF3X-CQg); and many others, from a variety of perspectives, both theists and nontheists.