You, collectively, are the Holy Spirit’s temple.

1 Corinthians 3.10-17.

From time to time Christians talk about how you, singular, individually, are the temple of the Holy Spirit.

’Cause the Spirit is sealed to every individual Christian. Ep 1.13 He lives in the heart of every single believer. And whatever God lives in is, properly, his temple. If he lives in you, it makes you his temple. If he lives in another Christian, it makes that person a temple. Dozens of Christians are dozens of temples. Billions of Christians are billions of temples. Get it?

But this isn’t accurate. God has only one temple.

As was kinda emphasized in the bible. Moses built the portable temple at Sinai, which English-speaking Christians call “the tabernacle,” and that was the temple for 4 centuries till Solomon ben David built a permanent one of gold-plated cedar in Jerusalem. The Babylonians burnt that down; Zerubbabel ben Shealtiel built another of stone; Herod 1 and his successors renovated it; the Romans eventually destroyed it.

But regardless of the structure, the scriptures emphasized there was one place, and only one place, where the LORD intended to meet people and receive worship and sacrifice. It was the one and only place they kept his ark, representing his relationship with Israel. It was the one and only place his name dwelt Dt 12.11 —his name, not the LORD himself, ’cause obviously the Almighty can’t be contained by a mere building.

Now it’s not that other people didn’t try to build temples for the LORD. Jeroboam ben Nabat, king of Samaria, feared losing subjects to the king of Jerusalem, so he built two more temples. They didn’t have arks, but Jeroboam put gold calf idols in them, figuring that’d do… and since there’s an entire command against idolatry in the 10 Commandments, God and his prophets condemned Jeroboam’s temples ever after. After the Jerusalem temple was destroyed, Egyptian Jews in exile constructed a temple to the LORD in Alexandria, and Samaritans constructed a temple to the LORD at Mt. Gerazim. But neither of these temples were commanded nor authorized by God. He had his own plans. Always had.

And once his temple’s veil ripped open, top to bottom, Mt 27.51 it signifies God wasn’t interested in being worshiped from Herod’s stone building any longer. He was gonna build a temple from entirely different stones: Living people. Living stones. Christians. Every Christian.

The Holy Spirit dwells in me, but I’m not the Holy Spirit’s temple. I’m only one of the stones of his temple. As are you. As is every Christian. We’re parts of his temple. Because the temple us us—collectively. The Spirit doesn’t have billions of temples; he only has the one. Same as always.

I know; you thought each individual Christian makes up an individual temple of the Spirit, right? ’Cause that’s the way it gets taught in our individualistic, individualism-valuing culture. Nope. We, collectively, are the Spirit’s temple.

Simoniac blogs.

If you remember what simony means—and if you don’t, it means people who are trying to make money from the sort of religious stuff which ought to be free—then you can kinda tell what today’s rant is gonna be about. But first, backstory.

I’ve been blogging for more than 20 years now. Back in 2002 I created an Angelfire website for myself, just ’cause I could. And I added a few extra pages to the site, in which I opined about this subject or that. It had been a few years since I last had a newspaper column, so I had a bunch of rants in my system to turn loose. I migrated it to GeoCities. Later, when I went to grad school and found a lot of my classmates had Xanga blogs, I started one too… then ported all that to Blogger, and I’ve been on that platform ever since. They host The Christ Almighty Blog, a.k.a. TXAB.

True, TXAB has only been around since 2015. But my first Blogger blog was a personal blog I started in 2004. Then I created a second blog for my bible studies, Towards a Fuller Understanding of God; then a third for my old comic strips, then a fourth for articles Smith Wigglesworth had published, then a fifth for fiction. Since I wanted to talk about more than just bible studies, I created a Christianity blog, More Christ, in 2010; but after a few years I ditched all the other blogs and consolidated everything into one blog, this one.

I had to look up all those dates ’cause I don’t keep track of anniversaries. For some people, celebrating how old their thing is, seems to take precedence over whether it’s still relevant, or any good. But I digress.

When I started blogging, of course I also started reading other people’s blogs. There weren’t a lot of them in 2002. Xanga got me reading all my friends’ blogs… most of whom had nothing to say, and now they have Facebook and can say even less. Xanga also got me reading other blogs in my “community”—other people who shared my views about Christ and politics, so I read what they had to say too.

But when I left Xanga for Blogger, of course I found other bloggers. Good ones.

Blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

Our English word blasphemy comes from the Greek word βλασφημία/vlasfimía, and largely means the same thing: It’s irreverence towards, and slander against, people and things we oughta reverence. We Christians tend to only use it to describe irreverence towards God (and bibliolaters to describe irreverence towards the bible), but the ancients applied it to all sorts of things. Like irreverence towards the temple, Moses, the prophets, and the scriptures. Even kings and emperors; yes you could blaspheme a king. Especially when they were one of those kings who claimed godhood. Some politicians still kinda get that way.

Some blasphemy is totally unintentional, like when we claim stuff about God that’s not so. Like when we claim, “God’s gonna send you to hell for that!” and no he won’t. Or when we claim God’s secret will is for evil to happen, and no it’s not.

Other times it’s totally intentional, ’cause we’re pissed at God over something he did or didn’t do, so we yell at him a bit, or otherwise throw a tantrum and say some evil things. God is fully aware we’re just acting up. And once we snap out of it, he forgives us. He’s gracious like that.

But then Jesus said this:

Mark 3.28-30 NASB

28“Truly I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons and daughters of men, and whatever blasphemies they commit; 29but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin”— 30because they were saying, “He has an unclean spirit.”

Said much the same thing in two other gospels. In context, it’s part of the story where Jerusalem scribes visiting the Galilee gave their expert opinion, and declared Jesus did his exorcisms by the power of Beelzebub (in Syriac Baal Zevúl, a local pagan god; their euphemism for Satan). Not the Holy Spirit. Jesus pointed out their reasoning was stupid: Satan’s not gonna fight itself, and if it is, it’s falling apart. And this is where he said blaspheming the Holy Spirit means you committed an αἰωνίου ἁμαρτήματος/eoníu amartímatos, “sin of the age,” or “eternal sin.” Mt 12.31-32, Lk 12.10

Historically, Christians have taught this means a sin which disqualifies you from Kingdom Come. Your friends and family are gonna join Jesus at his second coming—and you are gonna sit on the bench. Or stay dead till Judgment Day. Then go into the lake of sulfur and fire.

Yikes.

Hence some Christians are terrified of committing it. Afraid they might accidentally, unintentionally commit it. So afraid, they’re afraid of critiquing any miracle or prophet—even though we’re supposed to double-check these things, and make sure they’re really God. But they refuse to, lest they say “It’s devilish” when it’s really the Spirit, and stumble into blaspheming the Spirit. And that’s why so many Christians let so many phonies get away with so much evil.

On the other extreme, some Christians claim blasphemy of the Spirit never, ever happens. Not anymore. ’Cause cessationism! As soon as “that which is perfect has come,” 1Co 13.10 which cessationists insist refers to the bible, God switched off the miracles: He doesn’t need ’em to confirm his message anymore, ’cause now the bible does that. The conditions under which blasphemy of the Spirit could happen, no longer does. So whenever you see a “miracle,” or hear a “prophecy,” feel free to say it’s from Satan. The blind and deaf and paralyzed aren’t cured anymore; that’s Satan. Jesus doesn’t appear to people anymore; that’s Satan. And when those people respond by repenting, transforming their lives, producing good fruit, likewise praying for people and curing ’em: Yep, more Satan—hoo boy is that devil tricky, acting exactly like the Holy Spirit does in the bible, just to confuse people.

And on yet another axis you have those Christians who are quick to point to other scriptures which state God forgives every sin. 1Jn 1.7, 9 Every single possible potential sin; no exceptions. If you’re worried about the scriptures’ warnings against blaspheming the Spirit, relax! God forgives all.

Lastly we have the Christians who try their darnedest to redefine blaspheming the Spirit so it’s not what Jesus warned the scribes against doing. It’s some other thing. It’s apostasy. Or it’s numbing your conscience so much, you can’t tell the difference between good and evil anymore; confounding the Spirit with Satan is just a symptom of the real problem.

I think instead of convenient little answers which make us calm down and stop worrying about committing this sin, we oughta figure out for real what it is, whether we do it, and whether we can still get into God’s kingdom even if we did it.

Are Jehovah’s Witnesses Christian?

Years ago; different job. One of my clients needed to get his life straight—which didn’t require him to go to church, but it definitely doesn’t hurt! And since he grew up Jehovah’s Witness, and since the JW church was right down the street from where he lived, that’s where he went. Very quickly he became a cage-stage JW, and tried to tell me how wrong I was… and I told him, “Come back and talk Jesus to me when you can demonstrate more fruit of the Spirit; maybe then somebody will want to listen to you.”

That’s pretty consistently been my experience with the JWs: They’re right, I’m wrong, and any time I ask ’em questions about their beliefs, they presume I’m just trying to sow doubt. Which—I’ll be honest, and I’ll upfront tell them this too—I totally am. The Jehovah’s Witnesses are a heretic church, and the reason they proclaim so many heresies is because of their one core problem: Pride. Pride in being right. Pride in being the only church that’s right, while the rest of us are wrong and going to hell. And because they figure we’re wrong, their founders looked at every orthodox thing Christians believe, and deliberately experimented with the very heresies we rejected. And kept a bunch.

And the JW’s really attract prideful people—because hey, you wanna be right about God, don’t you? I’ve no doubt there are exceptions; there are actual humble Jehovah’s Witnesses in existence. It’s just I’ve never met any of them. Ever. Maybe you have; that’d be nice. I simply haven’t.

Still not ready for solid food.

1 Corinthians 3.1-9.

The Christians of ancient Corinth had divided themselves into factions which, it appears, weren’t getting along. There was the Apollos faction, emphasizing the teachings of the apostle who evangelized them; there was the Paul faction, emphasizing the teachings of the apostle who’d evangelized them. There was also a Simon Peter faction, and a Christ faction (or, likely, a “Christ only” faction; phooey on his apostles!). 1Co 1.12

This behavior, Paul and Sosthenes rebuked in 1 Corinthians. If these apostles are legitimately following Jesus—and from what we know, Apollos, Paul, and Peter certainly did—their teachings should harmonize. We might see minor discrepancies, ’cause the apostles weren’t infallible; only Jesus is. But these discrepancies should be irrelevant, ’cause all these guys are pointing beyond themselves, at Christ Jesus and his kingdom.

I’ve said more than once Paul isn’t infallible, and I’m fully aware there are gonna be Christians who balk at this idea. I mean yeah, they’re gonna acknowledge Paul’s various screw-ups which Luke recorded in the Acts of the Apostles; they’re right there in the bible; we can’t deny ’em. But they’re also gonna emphasize Paul wrote scripture, and his New Testament letters are fully trustworthy doctrine which Christians have followed for millennia. Arguably every Christian, with the exception of a few heretics, puts ourselves in the Paul faction. Apollos doesn’t have any letters in the New Testament… unless he’s the unknown author of Hebrews, and likely he’s not.

Still, Christians breaking ourselves into sects and flinging around the word “heresy” as if anything we don’t like qualifies as heresy: Yep, it started happening in the ancient church. Still happens. And shouldn’t. We need to overcome our differences and work together, and stop giving ammunition to antichrists who’d rather see all of us gone, and are as happy in a pig in poo whenever we fight one another.

In today’s passage, the apostles emphasize how Apollos and Paul are on the same team. Same Jesus. Same Holy Spirit empowering both of ’em.

1 Corinthians 3.1-9 KWL

1Fellow Christians, I can’t speak to you as Spiritual people,

but as fleshly people,

as “infants in Christ.”

2I give you milk, not solid food,

for you’re not ready.

You’re not able to feed yourselves even now,

3for you’re still fleshly people.

Why is there zeal and strife among you?

Aren’t you fleshly people?

Do you walk like pagan humans?

4For when someone might say, “I’m of Paul,”

and another, “I’m of Apollos,”

aren’t you pagan humans?

5So who is Apollos? Who is Paul? Servants!

You believe because of them,

however the Master gives faith to each person.

6I plant and Apollos waters,

but God is making you grow,

7so neither the planter nor waterer is someone vital,

but God is the grower.

8And the planter and waterer are one!

Each of us receives our own paycheck

for our own labor.

9For God is our coworker;

it’s God’s farm, God’s building.

Want divine insight? Listen to the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2.6-16.

Paul and Sosthenes start 1 Corinthians by talking about how they didn’t present the gospel of Christ Jesus with clever, wise reasoning, but with supernatural demonstrations of power.

But this is not to dismiss wisdom! It’s important. It’s just the kind of wisdom they’re talking about comes from the Holy Spirit, and in ancient Corinth, the only kind of wisdom the Corinthians knew about was Greek philosophy. Which, let’s be honest, is kinda clever in a lot of ways. But when the Greeks speculated about what God is like, they got him way wrong. The Greeks, particularly Plato of Athens, were into determinism big-time. There was a whole lot of speculation about the secret will of God or the gods. Stuff that’s actually leaked into Christianity, heavily influenced by former neo-Platonists like Augustine, and of course Augustine fans like Jean Calvin. Determinism has corrupted many a Christian’s concept of God, and kinda makes him out to be evil—if everything that happens was all pre-determined by God, there’s an awful lot of evil baked into the plan, isn’t there?

Proper wisdom, godly wisdom, comes from God himself. Namely the Holy Spirit, who is God, who’s come to live within every Christian and steer us right… provided we listen to him. You wanna know the deep things of God? Start listening to the Spirit!

1 Corinthians 2.6-16 KWL

6We speak of a comprehensive wisdom;

a wisdom not of this age,

nor of the rulers of this age; it’s meaningless.

7But we speak of God’s wisdom,

previously hidden in a mystery,

which God pre-decided before the ages

for our glory.

8Which none of the rulers of this age knew,

for if they knew,

they wouldn’t have crucified the glorious Master.

9But just as it was written,

“What eye doesn’t see and ear doesn’t hear,” Is 64.4

and doesn’t enter the human heart—

what God prepares for those who love him.

10God, through the Spirit, revealed them to us,

for the Spirit explores everything;

God’s depths as well.

11For who comprehends about humans,

and things about humans,

if not the spirit of a human that’s within them?

Thus also God-stuff—

nobody knows it but God’s Spirit.

12It’s not the world’s spirit we accept,

but the Spirit who’s from God,

so that we might have known

the things from God which he gives us.

13We also speak of God-stuff—

not in human teachings or wise lessons,

but in Spirit-teachings,

comparing Spirit-stuff to Spirit-stuff.

14A soulish person doesn’t accept the things of God’s Spirit,

for it’s “moronic” to them,

and they can’t understand it

because it’s discerned through the Spirit.

15A Spiritual person discerns everything

—and is discerned by no one.

16For “Who knows God’s mind? Who can advise him?” Is 40.13

We have Christ’s mind.

Blasphemy: Slandering God’s character.

BLASPHEME blæs'fim verb. Say something about God (or holy things) which isn’t true. Slander.

2. Speak irreverently about God or holy things. Sacrilege.

[Blasphemer blæs'fim.ər noun, blasphemous 'blæs.fə.məs adjective, blasphemy 'blæs.fə.mi noun.]

Popular culture tends to define blasphemy with the second definition: It’s a synonym for sacrilege, when one treats the sacred profanely. When we make fun, or make light, of holy things. When we tell jokes about God, or treat our bibles like any other book, and set ’em on the floor or take crayons to them to make colorful doodles in the margins. When people take God’s name in vain. When I treat him like my dad instead of OUR FATHER WHICH ART IN HEAVEN. (Heck, people think I’m blaspheming when I don’t capitalize all the Almighty’s pronouns.)

Really, people consider it blasphemy when they personally feel insulted—“on the Almighty’s behalf,” but really because they disapprove. If I don’t take off my hat in church, or wear jeans to a service, or take off my shoes, I’m blaspheming.

Yep, take off my shoes. I’ve done that multiple times. I could understand people’s objections if my feet were stinky, but they object because they’re offended by my naked feet. That is, till I quote ’em some bible:

Exodus 3.4-5 KJV

4And when the LORD saw that he turned aside to see, God called unto him out of the midst of the bush, and said, Moses, Moses. And he said, Here am I. 5And he said, Draw not nigh hither: put off thy shoes from off thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground.

Yep. You’re the one insulted by bare feet; God’s insulted by you wearing your fancy leather loafers in his holy presence. Now take ’em off. And the socks.

Anyway, thanks to the sentiments of conservative popular culture, I apparently blaspheme a lot. More than one Christian gets their knickers in a knot over my behavior. Including titling this blog Christ Almighty! They’re insulted, and therefore they presume God’s insulted. But this is just projection. As I demonstrated, they seldom know what offends God and what doesn’t… and back when I was a little kid, I realized that’s kinda important. You don’t wanna offend your savior! Might be a good idea to read that bible. But I digress.

For these folks, by blasphemy they really mean lèse-majesté, a handy French term which means “less majestic”—it was when the people of France treated their king in a way he didn’t consider consistent with the dignity he merited. (Well, imagined he merited. I’m American and the only king I recognize is Jesus. The rest, whether they know it or not, usurp his title.) Lèse-majesté is the invention of petty, insecure despots, who want everyone to suck up to them under pain of death. Esther experienced it when she had to petition the Persian shah for her people… but if she showed up unannounced, the shah might interpret it as an insult and have her killed. Es 4.11 Good thing he thought she was hot.

The reason Christians so often use lèse-majesté as our definition of blasphemy, is because there’s a bit of despotism in us. God’s neither insulted nor offended when his kids boldly approach his throne of grace. He 4.16 He wants us to do so. Invites us to do so. God has a thick skin—and a sense of humor. In contrast, these Christians don’t, and take offense because deep down they wanna be treated with rarified respect—and if that’s how we gotta behave with God, it makes it all the easier for them to suggest maybe we oughta treat them, “the Lord’s anointed,” with similar worship.

Hence they attempt to enforce divisions and ranks and barriers in God’s kingdom—all the stuff Jesus abolished by making every single one of us into God’s children, priests, and kings.

Well, enough about what blasphemy’s not. Let’s get to what it actually is.

Miracles first; message later.

1 Corinthians 2.1-5.

I grew up in a cessationist church; they believed God doesn’t do miracles anymore, and all their ministries and preaching was adapted to that worldview. So when they talked about sharing Jesus with other people, they never, ever talked about doing supernatural stuff as a part of it. No prophecy, no praying for people to be cured of various ailments; nothing like Jesus and the apostles did in the bible. Just… apologetics.

They didn’t always call it apologetics, but basically that’s what they did, and likely still do: Explaining why Jesus is Lord, what he did to save us from sin and death, encouraging people to believe this wholeheartedly, and say the sinner’s prayer. And ever since that church, I’ve read a bunch of other curricula about how to do evangelism; I even worked for an evangelism ministry for a year. Largely that’s what Evangelical evangelists focus on: Tell people how they can be saved, then talk ’em into believing it and embracing Jesus.

In contrast, in the bible, Jesus or the apostles would go somewhere, either prophesy or cure someone, and crowds would appear wanting to know, “What just happened? What’s this about?”—and then the apostles or Jesus would talk about God’s kingdom, and people would follow Jesus. Maybe get baptized.

No apologetics necessary! You don’t have to convince people God is real when they just saw God act. Yeah, they might deny what they just saw, or what it means, and we might need to challenge them not to. But that takes more commonsense than apologetics.

Anyway, in today’s passage Paul and Sosthenes remind the Christians of Corinth that this is what Paul did. Since he was already talking about earthly wisdom versus God, he just wanted to remind ’em he didn’t evangelize them with wisdom. He did stuff, and let the power of the Holy Spirit do all the speaking.

1 Corinthians 2.1-5 KWL

1Remember my coming to you, fellow Christians:

I come, not with an authoritative lesson,

nor preaching wisdom to you—

God’s now-revealed mystery.

2For I didn’t figure I knew anything about you,

except Christ Jesus, and this man crucified,

3and I became weak, afraid,

and greatly shaking among you.

4My lesson and my preaching

wasn’t lessons of wise persuasion,

but a demonstration of the Spirit and power

5so your faith wouldn’t be in human wisdom

but in God’s power.

And yes, cessationists are all wet. We can still do this. Always could. I’ve done it. Works great.

“Moronic Christian beliefs” are God’s wisdom.

1 Corinthians 1.17-31.

Right after Paul and Sosthenes critique the church of Corinth for dividing themselves into factions, the apostles get sidetracked into a talk about how the gospel they preach… is kinda stupid.

And yeah, making that statement is immediately gonna offend certain Christian snowflakes, so lemme explain, same as the apostles explained. To the world it’s stupid. To the world, which respects power, wealth, clever politicking (or even petty and stupid politicking, ’cause pwning your opponents counts as a win to them), popularity, fame, and especially the confusion or destruction of your foes, Christ’s victory over sin and death makes no sense.

In the Roman Empire it especially made no sense. Jesus of Nazareth was a convicted felon, who got the death penalty, and died in a nasty, embarrassing way: Buck naked, wrists and ankles nailed to a cross, left to suffocate and bleed out and die. That’s as big a defeat as any of ’em could imagine. That was a sign from the gods you were cursed. And this was the guy Christians worshiped, and called Master and King. Made no sense.

In today’s passage, the apostles kinda shrugged and said, “Yeah okay. It’s moronic. To you. Because you’re too proud to realize just how brilliant it actually is.”

1 Corinthians 1.10-31 KWL

17For Christ doesn’t send me to baptize,

but to evangelize.

And not with a wise message,

lest Christ’s cross be made irrelevant,

18for the cross’s lesson is “moronic”

to those who are destroying themselves.

To you who are being saved,

it’s God’s power—

19for it was written:

“I’ll destroy the wisdom of the wise.

I’ll nullify the thinking of the thinkers.” Is 29.14

20Where’s a wise person? Where’s a scribe?

Where’s a person who regularly disputes with this age?

Doesn’t God make the world’s wisdom “moronic”?

21Because—in God’s wisdom—

the world doesn’t come to know God through wisdom,

God is pleased through “moronic” preaching

to save those who believe in him.

22Jews ask for miraculous signs

and Greeks seek wisdom.

23We preach a Christ who was crucified;

Jews are scandalized,

and to gentiles this is “moronic.”

24To those who are invited, Jews and Greeks alike,

Christ is God’s power and God’s wisdom,

25because God’s “moronic” plan is wiser than humans.

God’s “weakness” is stronger than humans.

26For look at your invitation, fellow Christians!

Not many wise—by carnal standards.

Not many powerful.

Not many noble.

27But God chooses the world’s “morons” for himself,

so he might embarrass the wise.

God chooses the world’s weak,

so he might embarrass the strong.

28God chooses the world’s inferiors and outcasts.

Things which aren’t,

so he might negate things which are,

29so no carnal person

can elevate themselves before God.

30From this, you’re all in Christ Jesus,

who becomes our wisdom from God.

And justice! And holiness. And deliverance.

31Just like it was written:

“Promoters? Promote God!” Jr 9.24

Christian factions. Which shouldn’t exist.

1 Corinthians 1.10-17.

In Paul and Sosthenes’s greeting to the church of Corinth, they (but mostly Paul) states God made ’em wealthy in teaching, knowledge, and supernatural gifts. 1Co 1.5, 7 They legitimately are Christ Jesus’s church.

And then he gets into what they’re doing wrong. And it’s a lot. Corinth is not a healthy church! They got problems.

Which… actually works out to the benefit of the rest of Christendom. All our churches are gonna have problems like Corinth did. Hopefully not all of them at once!—and ideally none. But if we continue to minister to sinners (as we should!), and continue to get newbies who don’t know any better, we’re inevitably gonna have some. And when they crop up, we have Paul’s advice and instructions in 1 Corinthians to help set us straight.

So let’s get to the first of the problems: Factions. And if you’re Protestant, you know all about factions. There are thousands of Christian denominations out there. All of whom can get along, and absolutely should, because we all share the same Lord Jesus. But there are always some Christians who insist we absolutely should not, because our differences disqualify us from fellowship—from interacting with each other, ministering together, and worshiping Jesus together.

Just this morning I read a bit of a book critiquing a popular megachurch pastor who regularly insists most churches—not just a few!—are heretic, and going to hell. Plenty more Christians are just like him, and insist only their faction follows Christ correctly—and if we’re saved by our orthodoxy, only they will be saved.

I don’t know whether Corinth’s factions went this far. Hope not! But the apostles were offended that there should be any factions within Christ’s body; anybody who insisted their sect of Christianity was correct and the others not, when really we’re all wrong, and only Christ himself is right.

1 Corinthians 1.10-17 KWL

10Fellow Christians, I encourage you

in the name of our master Christ Jesus

so you all might say the same thing,

schisms might not exist among you,

and you might be joined together

with the same mind and thought process.

11For, my fellow Christians,

people from Chloe made it plain to me about you:

Fighting is among you.

12I’ll put it this way:

Each of you says, “I’m of Paul,” or “I’m of Apollos,”

“I’m of Kefa,” or “I’m of Christ.”

13Christ was divided?

Paul wasn’t crucified for you!

Or are you baptized in the name of Paul?

14I say grace to God: I baptized none of you!

—except Crispus and Gaius

15—so that no one might say I baptize in my own name.

16I also baptized the household of Stephanus;

otherwise I don’t know if I baptized anyone else.

17AFor Christ doesn’t send me to baptize,

but to evangelize.

Kefa in verse 12 is Simon Peter’s nickname in Syriac. Jn 1.42 Apollos is a Christian evangelist with whom Paul had worked a number of times. Paul you’ve heard of. Christ you’d better know.

Greetings to Corinth.

1 Corinthians 1.1-9.

I’ve already commented on bits and pieces of 1 Corinthians—mostly the parts having to do with supernatural gifts—but I should probably discuss the letter as a whole, should I? Yeah, why not.

Kórinthos (today’s “ancient Corinth,” Greece, 5km southwest of modern Corinth) was the capital of the Roman province of Achaea. Julius Caesar had completely destroyed the city on his way through in 44BC, and had rebuilt it as a Roman city, so it was way more Roman than Greek. Lots of pagan Greek temples… but lots of Latin inscriptions instead of Greek ones. Lots of visitors; more trade than the city could actually handle; plenty of cultural diversity. Including Jews, who moved in at the same time Caesar reestablished the city—so in that sense, they’d always been there.

The huge amount of trade which came through the town, had the effect of making money and wealth the thing which established status in that city. Not caste, like you found in the rest of the Roman Empire. In many ways it made Corinth a lot like the United States: Status came from what you had and what you could accomplish, not your family. Not that people didn’t still have their prejudices, which could still blindside and ruin you when you thought those things shouldn’t be relevant anymore. (Some things never do change.)

Paul of Tarsus had lived in Corinth from the years 50 to 51, working as a tentmaker and tanner, and trying to teach in synagogue until the Jews had enough of him. Ac 18.1-11 A few years later, probably 54 or 55, Paul and Sosthenes wrote this letter. It’s not the only letter to Corinth; scholars speculate there were three, and of course the New Testament includes two of ’em, presented in order of length: 1 Corinthians is longer, and likely written earlier, although there’s always the chance it might not be.

So Paul you’ve heard of. There’s a Sosthenes who was president of the Corinthian synagogue, who got beaten by a mob after the Corinthian Jews unsuccessfully tried to get Paul condemned by the Roman proconsul. Ac 18.12-17 He might be the same Sosthenes who wrote this letter, but there’s nothing in the scriptures about him later becoming Christian. His predecessor Crispus certainly did Ac 18.8 —and some people have speculated Crispus is Sosthenes’s family name; that it’s all the same guy. But that’s pure speculation. Sosthenes is a common ancient Greek name.

Of course Paul brings up Corinth’s wealth in the introduction to the letter:

1 Corinthians 1.1-9 KWL

1Paul, invited to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by God’s will,

and brother Sosthenes

2to God’s church existing in Corinth,

made holy in Christ Jesus,

invited to be saints,

with all those invited to go by the name of our master, Christ Jesus,

in every place, both theirs and ours:

3Grace to you, and peace

from God our Father and master Christ Jesus.

4I always say grace to my God about you all,

on top of God’s grace,

which he gives you in Christ Jesus.

5For in God you’re made wealthy in everything;

in every teaching and every knowledge,

6as the witness of Christ confirms in you all.

7Thus none of you are lacking in any supernatural gift

as you’re awaiting the revelation

of our master Christ Jesus;

8At the End, Jesus will also confirm you all as not guilty

on the Judgment Day of our master Christ Jesus.

9Trustworthy God!—through whom

you’re invited to a partnership with his son, our master Christ Jesus.

You notice Paul contrasts Corinth’s earthly wealth with God’s supernatural wealth—“in God you’re made wealthy in everything.” You got knowledge. Supernatural gifts. Grace. And when Jesus returns, you won’t be judged, because he doesn’t judge those who heed his message and trust the One who sent him. Jn 5.24

The fivefold ministry. Or is it fourfold? Sevenfold?

FIVEFOLD MINISTRY 'faɪv.foʊld 'mɪn.ɪs.tri noun. A form of church leadership in which an individual congregation is led by five leaders, with duties corresponding to the five gifts Christ granted to build up his body. Ep 4.11

Christians have come up with a number of different ways to run Christ Jesus’s chruches. Initially the church was led by the Twelve, although that proved impractical as it grew, and as the Twelve spread out to other provinces and countries, or died off. The model we see in Paul’s pastoral letters suggests they ultimately borrowed the setup of Pharisee synagogues: An ἐπίσκοπος/epískopos, “supervisor” (which evolved into the English word “bishop”) who oversees the various spiritually mature Christians put in charge of all the other duties and ministries. Among the Orthodox and Catholic churches this evolved into archbishops and priests, but you’ll likewise see it in some Protestant churches which have pastors and presbyters.

But other Protestant churches have experimented with all sorts of leadership models. I was once a member of a church with a pastoral team: Five pastors who shared the job, took turns preaching the sermons, and handling various duties. I’ve been part of a church which claimed to have no leadership, and that they were entirely led by the Holy Spirit. (In practice, certain folks just happened to “hear the Spirit” way more than others, and wound up leading by default.) I’ve also been in congregationalist churches, which are basically run by direct democracy: The church members meet every month, and vote on every item of business. In meetings which can go on for hours.

Are those leadership models in the bible? Nah. Is that a problem? Not really. Because regardless of which leadership setup you choose, the important factor which makes it work is the people and leaders follow Jesus. If they do, the leadership setup actually doesn’t matter, because Jesus is gonna rule. And if they don’t, it doesn’t matter how “biblical” your setup is: The church is always gonna go wrong. Guaranteed.

At some other point I’ll list all the different models. But today I’m obviously gonna rant write about the fivefold ministry model.

It’s a relatively new leadership structure. Invented in the 1970s, and adopted by a lot of churches in the charismatic “apostolic movement.” These church are meant to be run by either five elders, or five teams of elders. (Since each of these teams tends to have a supervisor in charge of it… functionally it’s still five elders.) And each of these elders holds a different office, or has different job duties, which correspond to one of Christ Jesus’s five ministry gifts, listed by Paul in Ephesians.

Ephesians 4.11-12 KJV

11And [Christ] gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

In short, the five leaders of a fivefold church are designated as an apostle, a prophet, an evangelist, a pastor, and a teacher.

Now. Historically Christians haven’t taught these are five jobs, but five gifts. They’re different abilities to minister. Different aptitudes. I have a knack for teaching; another’s gonna have a knack for evangelism. Another for prophecy, another for pastoral care.

But, I should point out, while I have a knack for teaching, I sometimes do all the other things. Because I’ve been in Christian leadership long enough to know how to do all of ’em. I can evangelize. I can prophesy. I can pastor. I can even function as an apostle if the Holy Spirit gives me a certain task to accomplish.

’Cause in practice, the Holy Spirit grants all these gifts to various Christian leaders on an ad hoc basis. Not just one and only one gift to one person. Jesus is an obvious example of someone who simultaneously had all five gifts:

• APOSTLE: Jesus was sent by God. He 3.1
• PROPHET: Jesus shares God’s word. Mt 21.11
• EVANGELIST: Jesus shares the good news of his kingdom. Mk 1.14
• PASTOR: Jesus is our good shepherd, Jn 10.11 our leader.
• TEACHER: Jesus is a rabbi, Jn 13.13 and our only rabbi. Mt 23.10

“Well of course Jesus could do ’em all,” various Christians reply, ”because he’s Jesus!” Yep, that’s everybody’s favorite excuse for not doing as Jesus does: He’s exceptional. And to be fair, he is. But not in this are—’cause loads of his apostles also simultaneously had all five gifts. You see ’em in Peter, John, Philip, Paul, James; and you’ll notice most churches regularly expect their head pastor to have these abilities whenever necessary. Apostles in that God called ’em into ministry. Prophets in that they can recognize God’s voice and authoritatively talk about God’s will. Evangelists ’cause they lead people to Jesus. Pastors ’cause they shepherd the people of their churches. And teachers ’cause they gotta teach us everything Jesus taught.

Fivefold ministry advocates point out this is an awful lot of work to put upon just one person. They’re not wrong! It’s why the mature Christians of a church need to step up and help their pastor. But the fivefold folks claim the list in Ephesians is a jobs list: The Holy Spirit divvied up these jobs, just like he scattered his supernatural gifts among different Christians. 1Co 12.7 Therefore each church shouldn’t only have a pastor in charge, but have five leaders. A pastor of course. And also an apostle, prophet, evangelist, and teacher.

The self-anointed prophet.

This last weekend I heard someone talk about God’s “anointed prophets,” as if that’s actually a thing from the bible. In fact it’s not.

How God makes prophets is ridiculously simple: He starts talking to someone. Might be Samuel ben Elkanah.

1 Samuel 3.6-11 NLT

6Then the LORD called out again, “Samuel!”

Again Samuel got up and went to Eli. “Here I am. Did you call me?”

“I didn’t call you, my son,” Eli said. “Go back to bed.”

7Samuel did not yet know the LORD because he had never had a message from the LORD before. 8So the LORD called a third time, and once more Samuel got up and went to Eli. “Here I am. Did you call me?”

Then Eli realized it was the LORD who was calling the boy. 9 So he said to Samuel, “Go and lie down again, and if someone calls again, say, ‘Speak, LORD, your servant is listening.’” So Samuel went back to bed.

10And the LORD came and called as before, “Samuel! Samuel!”

And Samuel replied, “Speak, your servant is listening.”

11Then the LORD said to Samuel, “I am about to do a shocking thing in Israel.”

Might be Jeremiah ben Hilkiah.

Jeremiah 1.4-10 NLT

4The LORD gave me this message:

5“I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb.

Before you were born I set you apart

and appointed you as my prophet to the nations.”

6“O Sovereign LORD,” I said, “I can’t speak for you! I’m too young!”

7 The LORD replied, “Don’t say, ‘I’m too young,’ for you must go wherever I send you and say whatever I tell you. 8And don’t be afraid of the people, for I will be with you and will protect you. I, the LORD, have spoken!” 9Then the LORD reached out and touched my mouth and said,

“Look, I have put my words in your mouth!

10Today I appoint you to stand up

against nations and kingdoms.

Some you must uproot and tear down,

destroy and overthrow.

Others you must build up

and plant.”

Might be Ezekiel ben Buzi.

Ezekiel 1.28 - 2.5 NLT

28All around him was a glowing halo, like a rainbow shining in the clouds on a rainy day. This is what the glory of the LORD looked like to me. When I saw it, I fell face down on the ground, and I heard someone’s voice speaking to me.

1“Stand up, son of man,” said the voice. “I want to speak with you.” 2The Spirit came into me as he spoke, and he set me on my feet. I listened carefully to his words. 3“Son of man,” he said, “I am sending you to the nation of Israel, a rebellious nation that has rebelled against me. They and their ancestors have been rebelling against me to this very day. 4They are a stubborn and hard-hearted people. But I am sending you to say to them, ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says!’ 5And whether they listen or refuse to listen—for remember, they are rebels—at least they will know they have had a prophet among them.”

But in none of these instances do we see God anoint his prophets. He commissions them to speak in his name, tells them what he wants people to hear, and off they go.

Now yeah, you’re gonna hear Christians, and prophets who want people to consider them authority figures, talk about how God’s prophets have “the anointing.” And they’re gonna try to define lots things as anointing. So let’s first get that definition right, shall we? Anointing is when you literally pour oil over someone’s head. Ancient Israelis did that to people to indicate God chose ’em to lead. Not prophesy; lead. Anyone can prophesy. Not everyone can lead.

You’re also gonna see Christians point to Elisha, ’cause the LORD instructed his prophet Elijah to anoint him—

1 Kings 19.16 NLT

“Then anoint Jehu grandson of Nimshi to be king of Israel, and anoint Elisha son of Shaphat from the town of Abel-meholah to replace you as my prophet.”

—and claim, “There! Right there! There’s an anointed prophet!” But Elisha’s the only anointed prophet in bible. (Unless you count King David ben Jesse, who was indeed a prophet Ac 2.30 —he did hear from God! But David was anointed to be king, not prophet.) And here’s the thing about Elisha: Elijah, his predecessor, wasn’t only a prophet, but was also the leader of the בְנֵֽי־הַנְּבִיאִ֥ים/vnéi haneviím, the “sons of the prophets,” 2Ki 2.15 a prophecy guild. He anointed Elisha to lead that guild. Not to become a prophet—for Elisha was already a prophet.

Go ahead. Poke around the bible for the prophets’ first God-experiences. Some will be dramatic, like Ezekiel’s vision. Some won’t be. Christians like to point to when Isaiah saw the LORD in temple, with the seraphs and burning coal and “Holy holy holy!” and all that, Is 6.1-13 and claim the burning coal is Isaiah’s “anointing.” But that vision is in the sixth chapter of the book of Isaiah. There are five chapters before it! Five chapters of prophecies before it. And in none of them does Isaiah get anointed to become a prophet. He just starts prophesying. Because God talked to him, and he shared what he heard.

I’m not knocking profound experiences. They’re awesome. But God doesn’t need to start with them, and usually doesn’t. More often it’s like when he first talked to Samuel. Nobody gets “anointed.” Commissioned, yes. That’s all.

Anointing, like I said, is for leadership. God still picks leaders, and has us recognize his choices; and when we do that, typically we lay hands on them and pray for them, and somebody puts oil on ’em. Sometimes it’s a dab on their forehead; sometimes we dump a whole bottle or horn of it all over ’em, like the ancient Israelis did with their kings. But again, that’s leaders. Not prophets.

And if a leader prophesies—and they can; God can talk to them same as he talks to everyone—okay then we’re actually talking about an anointed prophet. But their anointing for leadership, and their ability as prophet, are actually two different things. Two separate things. The anointing doesn’t make ’em a greater prophet, and the prophecy doesn’t make ’em a better leader. And same as every prophet, we gotta confirm these prophecies, and not foolishly assume their anointing has made ’em an infallible prophet.

So when someone starts calling themselves one of God’s anointed prophets, what we’ve got here is someone who’s either honestly unaware of how God selects prophets… or is trying to pull a fast one, and claim leadership, or demand our obedience, solely because they claim they heard God. But if they’re not already in leadership, that’s an illegitimate claim. That’s like Samuel telling Eli, “I heard God, so you should make me co-head priest.” Or Jeremiah telling King Josiah ben Amon, “I hear God, so you should make me co-king.” It’s rubbish, and if these prophets seriously expect us to believe this and catapult them into leadership, beware.

The International Critical Commentary.

My bible software of choice is Accordance. I have a lot of their modules, and of course they wouldn’t mind at all if I bought more. So most days a week, they send me an email informing me of their sales. They have individual books, and of course full sets of bible commentaries.

Yes, I’ve bought a few, and they’re pricey. And sometimes when I tell people I’ve bought ’em, they’re stunned. “You spent that on a bible commentary? You know you can get Matthew Henry’s commentary for $3.”

Pfff, $10? I could get it for free.

I mean, I already have it. Decades ago (yes, it’s been multiple decades now) I bought a CD full of public-domain bibles and Christian literature, and of course Henry’s commentary is in there too. Plus a few other multi-volume bible commentaries.

I don’t look at ’em much, because those commentaries—like Henry’s, and many of the other free commentaries on the internet—are devotional in nature. That is, the commentator read some bible, wrote down his thoughts about ’em, and that’s what you have. Some of them are clever and insightful. Some are most definitely not clever and insightful; they’re the sort of regurgitated pop-culture junk you can find in Facebook posts. They’re not worth any money you might spend on ’em, so hopefully you’ve spent none!

What I actually want in a bible commentary—which is why, over the years, I’ve paid a bunch of money for such commentaries—is ancient history. Study of the ancient languages. Archeological evidence, if you have any. Maybe a thoughtful discussion on the multiple ways Christians have viewed this particular scripture over the years, just so I can see where the points of debate are… and maybe hear a view I’ve not heard before in dozens of sermons.

Free commentaries like that are mighty hard to come by, but here’s one: The International Critical Commentary. “International” in that it was written by Americans, Brits, and Canadians, and “critical” in that the authors compare different ancient manuscripts of the bible in order to get the best reading of the text.

The ICC is still being published by T&T Clark, but the older editions of the commentary are out of copyright, so they’ve been scanned and posted on the internet by the good folks at Google Books and Internet Archive. I’ve listed below what I can find. Internet Archive has multiple scans of these books, so if you don’t like the one I’ve linked to, find another! Google Books, on the other hand, will remove books if a publisher pushes ’em hard enough—even if books are in the public domain. (Just goes to show you the difference between a non-profit which stands up for something, and a for-profit which sometimes really doesn’t.)

Anywho, in some of the books you’ll find a list of all the books of the bible, and wonder why on earth I don’t have that volume (it’s the one you wanted to look at most, right?) and it’s because the guys who were supposed to write that book, ultimately didn’t. Optimistic advertising, I guess.

God knows the plans he has for you.

Jeremiah 29.11.

Jeremiah 29.11 NIV

“For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the LORD, “plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.”

Whenever English-speaking Christians quote this verse, I tend to hear the New International Version translation most often. Oddly, not the been-around-way-longer King James:

Jeremiah 29.11 KJV

For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end.

I suspect it’s ’cause the words “prosper” and “hope” and “future” are in the NIV, so it comes across as way more optimistic and inspiring. It’s why Christians quote it like crazy. Like the evangelists tell us, “God has a wonderful plan for your life,” and this verse brilliantly affirms it: God thinks warm, wonderful things about us. He has a good, fine plan, with a good future.

Some of us figure this future is heaven, and some of us figure it’s all the worldly success the American Dream can offer. But, y’know, Christianized. This way we’re comfortably wealthy, but our comfort and wealth somehow hasn’t turned us into out-of-touch, self-entitled jerks. Instead we’re “good stewards” of that wealth… but I gotta tell ya, in practice stewardship tends to look a little out-of-touch, and tends to hoard wealth on the basis of “God gave these riches to me, not the needy, so I must deserve it more than they.” But I digress.

Like many out-of-context scriptures, neither the NIV nor KJV variants are a mistranslation. I translated it myself, and my own results aren’t far different from the NIV and KJV. (Nor should it be.)

Jeremiah 29.11 KWL

“Because I know the intentions I plan over you,” the LORD states.

“Intentions of peace, not evil.

To give you a proper ending, and hope.”

The verse is about what God has in store for his people. He plans good, not evil. (Especially not secret, behind-the-scenes evil stuff, like natural disasters and wars; whereas in public he maintains moral superiority. I know certain Christians claim otherwise, but God’s no hypocrite.) God wants his people to have good lives. Not bad.

Thing is: The people God addressed in this prophecy are the Hebrews of southern Israel, the tribes which the writers of the Old Testament collectively call “Judah,” and the writers of the New Testament call “Judea.” These’d be the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, and Simeon; plus Levites and various members of other tribes who lived in the cities. Collectively, “Jews.”

Jeremiah prophesied it between the years 586 and 581BCE, after King Jeconiah, his family and court, and Jerusalem’s officials had been dragged to Babylon as captives of Nebuchadnezzar’s troops. Jr 29.2 In fact this prophecy was a message to these very captives. Not necessarily to all the Jews in the sixth century before the Christian Era. And certainly not 21st-century gentiles. Nor even all us Christians.

But we’d sure like it to be us, wouldn’t we? And that’s why we claim it for ourselves. We justify it by saying, “God doesn’t change Ml 3.6 —his attitude towards all people, whether ancient Hebrews or present-day Christians, oughta be this very same gracious-sounding offer of peace and safety. So let’s take him up on it!

Oh, and let’s post this verse on our walls someplace. Underneath some nice Thomas Kinkade paintings of a house lit up as if by a kitchen fire. Or something otherwise inspirational. Let’s recite it to ourselves whenever we’re feeling down, or overwhelmed, or like we’ve lost one of the many minor battles in life. God’s working all things together for our good, right? Ro 8.28 His plans for us are prosperity, peace, and hope, right?

Last words to Titus.

Titus 3.12-15.

Paul wraps up his letter to Titus with the usual stuff you might find in any personal correspondence; plans to meet, people you oughta bring along, friends who say hi, and salutations. Goes like this.

Titus 3.12-15 KWL

12I might send either Artemas or Tychicus to you;

when I do, be quick to come to me in Nikópolis,

for I decided to winter there.

13Quickly bring Zenas the lawyer, and Apollos, with you,

so they might not be left behind.

14Our people must also learn to maintain good works;

they’re necessary business

so they might not be fruitless.

15Everyone with me greets you.

Greet our friends in faith.

Grace to all of you. {Amen.}

Verse 12 is why some people, including the editors of the Textus Receptus, figured Paul wrote this from Nikópolis, Macedon. But since he calls it “there” when he wrote this, instead of “here,” kinda looks to me like he’s not there yet! We shouldn’t be surprised if he wrote it on his way somewhere.

Travel back then was particularly difficult in winter, ’cause weather, and no reliable way to forecast it. So Paul had to hunker down somewhere, and Nikópolis had decent resources and decent temperatures.

Artemas and Tychicus were members of Paul’s ministry team. They’re both Greek names, but don’t presume that automatically makes ’em Greek; plenty of Jews back then had gentile names, same as today. Like Apollos, who had the same name as the Greek sun god; and “Artemas” is the masculine version of Artemis, the moon god. Artemas is never referenced in the bible again, but Tychicus comes up in Acts 20.4 as being from the province of Asia Minor, and Paul refers to him in four different letters. Ep 6.21, Cl 4.7, 2Ti 4.12, Tt 3.12 He had him deliver letters a lot!

Paul tells Titus to bring two guys with him: Zenas “the lawyer,” and Apollos. Zenas, short for the Greek name Zenodoros (meaning “gift of Zeus”) isn’t ever mentioned again. We’ve no idea what sort of lawyer Zenas was—whether he was a Jew, and an expert in the Law of Moses; or a gentile, and an expert in Roman law. Paul calls him “the lawyer” likely because both he and Titus knew another guy named Zenas, and wanted to indicate the right Zenas. As for Apollos, he’s the apostle—the Alexandrian Jew who was full of the Spirit, eloquent, knew his bible, taught Christians, and most tellingly, was receptive to correction. Ac 18.24-28 Paul refers to him a bunch of times too. 1Co 3.4-6, 22, 4.6, 16.12, Tt 3.13

Then, kind of as an afterthought, there’s an important verse about good works.

Put a stop to argumentative Christians.

Titus 3.8-11.

Paul’s letter to Titus is full of advice on how to deal with Christians behaving badly, although recently I’ve heard a preacher using the pastoral epistles to attack pagans behaving badly. That’s not why it was written. My guess is he really wanted to criticize pagans, and wrongly thought these scriptures might help him do it. Problem is, these letters were written to correct us, to keep us on the straight and narrow… and now the people of his church—if they never double-check their pastor to make sure he was right, and let’s be honest; many don’t!—are gonna ignore the apostles’ corrections, think these verses are about pagans not them, and continue being jerks.

Because that’s precisely why Paul wrote the letters! The people of Titus and Timothy’s churches, same as the people of many Christian churches, were being self-righteous jerks, and their pastors needed to shut that bad behavior down. Still do! Too many pastors either lack the spine to do it, or the wisdom to know how to steer people lovingly—they try to discipline their churches with threats and bluntness, and that just drives people away, to attend other churches where the pastors never, ever correct ’em.

And one of the most common pestilences we see in Christian churches, is what we see in today’s passage. It’s about argumentative Christians. Argumentativeness is a work of the flesh, but so many of us justify our fighting and debating and “apologetics” by claiming, “I’m standing up for the truth. I’m doing it for Jesus!” Yeah, no we’re not. We’re indulging our lust for battle, which you can see by all the other carnal, bad fruit which emerges from these fights: Anger, harsh words, hurt feelings, unforgiveness, grudges, vengeance. Even full church splits.

That’s why Paul instructed Titus to nip ’em in the bud.

Titus 3.8-11 KWL

8A true teaching—

and I’d like you to regularly insist on these things

so those who trusted God

might thoughtfully practice good works.

These things are good and helpful for people.

9Moronic lessons and good heritage,

friction, and fights over the Law:

Step away, for they’re wasteful and meaningless.

10After the first and second rebukes,

shut down a heretic person,

11knowing such a person was uprooted

and sins, condemning one’s self.

I have several Greek New Testaments, which I look at when I’m translating bible; including ancient copies of the NT like the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexandrinus. (The Codex Vaticanus doesn’t include Titus.) The ancient copies don’t have punctuation, but some of ’em do have paragraphs, and verse 8 is the beginning of a new paragraph in the Alexandrinus. But Desiderius Erasmus and Robert Estienne, editors of the Textus Receptus (which did use the Alexandrinus text as a reference, and was later used to translate the King James) came up with their own paragraphs. Which is why some bibles either make verse 8 part of the previous paragraph, or make verses 1–11 into one big paragraph. Grammatically, verse 8 can be its very own paragraph. But I’ll just go with the ancient Christians on this one: The previous passages were “a true teaching” (KJV “faithful saying”), but heads up: There are also false teachings.

Apocrypha: The “extra books” your bible may lack.

APOCRYPHON ə'pɑk.rə.fɔn noun. A writing or book not considered part of the accepted canon of scripture.

2. Story of doubtful authenticity.

3. Story that’s obscure or little-known.

[Apocrypha ə'pɑk.rə.fə plural, apocryphal əˈpɑkrəfəl adjective.]

One of my favorite stunts with new Christians used to be, “Turn in your bibles to the book of Wisdom, chapter 4.” And they’d try—they’d flip around their bibles, then give up and look at the table of contents… then realize the book wasn’t there.

“Well it’s in my bible,” I’d tell ’em. And hold it up to show them, confusing them all the more.

My bible included apocrypha. Actually a few of my bibles include apocrypha. And I know; you’re thinking, “Oh, those are Catholic bibles.” Nope; I do own a Catholic bible, but it’s only a New Testament, which has no apocrypha. All my bibles with the apocrypha included are Protestant. Yep, some Protestant bibles have them!

Unfortunately I can’t pull this stunt anymore, ’cause nowadays people look up the bible on their phones. And a lot of bible apps include apocrypha, so they can actually find Wisdom in there. Bible Gateway has apocrypha too. Spoils my little joke. Oh well.

But I had a reason for this joke: I wanted to introduce newbies to the fact not every bible includes all the same books. Orthodox, Catholic, Lutheran, and Anglican bibles are gonna have books in them which your average Evangelical bible will not. Evangelicals call these books apocrypha. Catholics call ’em deuterocanon, and Orthodox anagignoskómena.

Contrary to popular belief, they’re not merely “extra books.” For four centuries before Jesus, Greek-speaking Jews had these books in their bibles. For 17 centuries thereafter, Greek-speaking, Latin-speaking, and English-speaking Christians had ’em in their bibles. Some of these books got quoted in the New Testament. Got quoted by the early church fathers. Got translated and included in the Geneva Bible and King James Version. Seriously.

So when people ask me “Why do Catholics have extra books?” I gotta point out the proper question is why we Evangelicals don’t include these books. ’Cause the majority of Christians in the world do have ’em. And Evangelical Protestants used to have no problem with including ’em in our bibles… well, for about two centuries. Wasn’t till the Puritans began purging apocrypha from bibles that they even became an issue.

Today we have some Protestants who insist not only should apocrypha not be in bibles, but claim they’re devilish. Doesn’t matter that Martin Luther called ’em nützliche, aber nicht heilige Schriften/“useful, but not holy writings.” To these dark Christians, not only are apocrypha not useful, but they (and Roman Catholics) are part of Satan’s evil conspiracy to corrupt the bible.

Here’s what conspiracy theorist Jack Chick had to say on the topic. [The Attack, 8]

According to these cranks, if you read any of the apocrypha, they’ll corrupt you too. Flee the scary books!

Well, let’s put aside the loopy paranoia and get to what apocrypha actually are.

Submission. It’s not domination.

SUBMIT səb'mɪt verb. Yield to or accept a superior force, authority, or will. Consent to their conditions.

2. Present one’s will to another for their consideration or judgment.

[Submission səb'mɪs.ʃən noun.]

Notice there are two popular definitions of submit in use. The more popular of the two has to do with acceptance, obedience, and blind capitulation. To turn off our brains, to do as we’re told. And most sermons instruct Christians to do precisely that. Submit to one another, as Paul ordered.

Ephesians 5.21 ESV

…submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.

’Cause we kinda have to. If we can’t submit to God—if we insist on our own way, our own standards, our own values, our own lifestyles—it’s a pretty good bet we’re outside his kingdom.

Romans 8.5-8 ESV

5For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

So we especially submit to God. Jm 4.7 And to Christian leaders; 1Pe 5.5 we follow the doctrines they proclaim from the pulpit. And wives, submit to your husbands. Ep 5.22 When he says “Jump,” you ask “How high?”

Then there’s the other definition of submit: The one where it’s not typical of a relationship between a benevolent (or not-so-benevolent) despot and their subjects, but between partners, friends, or coworkers. One where we instead bounce ideas off one another. Find out whether these ideas help or inconvenience one another—and of course try to get ’em to help as best we can.

One which sounds appropriate for a παράκλητος/paráklitos, “helper” Jn 14.16, 14.26, 15.26, 16.7 and the people he’s trying to help. For a teacher and his pupils. For a loving God and his kids.

So… which definition d’you think fits what the authors of the scriptures were talking about?

Oh, the benevolent despot thingy? Well it does work for cult leaders and wannabe patriarchs. But in God’s kingdom, where the king calls us his friends, Jn 15.15 where love doesn’t demand its own way, 1Co 13.5 it’s pretty obvious the despotic definition is entirely incorrect. In many ways it’s kinda the opposite of God’s intent. Almost as if the devil got Christians to flip it 180 degrees, n’est-ce pas?

Praying for the dead.

Praying for the dead is a controversial subject among Evangelicals. Because just about everybody does it. Yet just about every Evangelical preacher I’ve heard, has insisted we absolutely shouldn’t.

Yeah, you might be thinking, “I’ve never done it.” You’d be rare. When a loved one dies, usually most Christians will pray, “God, grant them peace,” or “God, grant them eternal rest,” or otherwise ask God to make sure they’re nice ’n comfortable in paradise. (Or “heaven,” because your average Christian doesn’t know squat about the afterlife, and thinks they’re in heaven.) We want the best for our loved ones, and we know God wants the best for our loved ones, and isn’t asking God for their best a form of praying for God’s will to be done? What’d be wrong with that? It’s a prayer we can be sure he’ll answer “yes” to!

Other times when a loved one dies, we Christians might not be all that sure about their eternal destination. It’ll be someone whose relationship with Jesus… well, bluntly, sucked. There are an awful lot of those! They might’ve claimed to be Christian, but never went to church, didn’t know jack squat about the bible, and Jesus’s teachings, and grace. Never displayed any good fruit—in fact they displayed quite a lot of bad fruit, and you wouldn’t know ’em from pagans if you had to pick ’em out of a lineup with paper bags over their heads. We hope they’re in paradise, but we have a bad feeling there’s every chance they may not be. So we’re praying! The prayers vary. Some of us actually try to pray ’em into paradise, if that’s possible (and it’s likely not). Others are praying for their own peace of mind; they don’t like that their loved ones may not be in paradise, but either way, God’s will be done.

Often there are those people who want God to pass a message to their loved ones. Being dead, the loved ones clearly can’t hear us, but they oughta be able to hear God. And we want them to know we love them. Or that we’re okay; or we’ll be okay, eventually. Or that we miss ’em. Or something sentimental; so God, could you let ’em know? Please? Thanks.

And, since I’m posting this on Memorial Day in the United States, there are gonna be those people who pray that God honor our dead, bless their memory, and ask that good fruit will come from their sacrifices. While some Evangelicals might claim that’s not actually praying for the dead, let’s not be hypocrites; it absolutely is, yet y’all don’t seem to have any problem with that. Heck, some of the preachers who shout, “We don’t pray for the dead!” the loudest, will eagerly lead those prayers on Memorial Day.

So who’s right? Well obviously I’m not siding with the preachers. (Not completely.)

The armor of God.

Ephesians 6.10-17.

Christians are fascinated by the armor-of-God metaphor which Paul used in Ephesians 6. Sometimes too fascinated.

Jesus teaches us to foster and encourage peace. Mt 5.9 Of course, our depraved human nature would much rather fight, and kick ass for Jesus if we can. So the idea we get to wear armor and play soldier really fires up certain Christians, who’d love to engage in a little testosterone-fueled warfare, and find this passage an excuse to indulge their blood-soaked he-man fantasies a little. If only metaphorically.

For such people, God’s armor is never for defense, Ep 6.11 but offense. Those who fancy themselves “prayer warriors” love to talk about how to attack with this armor. Christians even make plastic armor for children to play with—including a sword of the Spirit, Ep 6.17 which kids can use to smite one another. In so doing they learn—wrongly, even blasphemously—the word of God is about hurting people.

But just because God’s word is sharper than a sword He 4.12 doesn’t mean we’re to wield it like that! Using it surgically is the Holy Spirit’s job. When we use it, we’re not so precise. Without his guidance it’s a blunt instrument, used to maim our foes, not cure them.

But as part of Paul’s inventory of God’s armor, properly the sword is likewise used for defense. It’s used to parry our opponents’ swords, just as Jesus did with Satan. Our Lord quoted Deuteronomy in order to defeat the devil’s temptations. We gotta do likewise: Assuming we know what God’s told us (and assuming we’re not just projecting our own will upon him), we quote it at devils and naysayers and use it to resist.

Paul actually borrowed the idea of God’s armor from Isaiah 59.17, and expanded upon it a little.

Ephesians 6.10-17 KWL

10As for the rest, {my family}:

Be empowered by the Master,

and in the might of his strength.

11Put on all of God’s gear,

so you can enable yourself to stand against the devil’s tactics.

12Because the struggle isn’t us against blood and body,

but against types of rule,

against special privilege,

against the things which rule this dark world {in this age},

against supernatural evil in the high heavens.

13This is why, so receive all God’s gear,

so you might be able to stand against those things on the evil day,

and they’re enabling you to withstand everything.

14So stand: Belt your waist with truth.

Put on the body armor of justice.

15Lace up your shoes in preparation

to deliver the good news of peace.

16Carry at all times the shield of trust in God,

which you’ll use to put out every flaming arrow of evil.

17Accept the helmet of your salvation

and the machete of the Spirit—

which is God’s spoken word.

And pray at all times in the Spirit Ep 6.18 —but I’ll discuss that another time.

To whom are the scriptures written? It’s kinda important.

Some months ago I visited another church. (So if my pastors are worried this article’s about them: Relax! I figure you know better than to do this.)

The passage was from the New Testament; Paul of Tarsus was, as usual, correcting Christians. I won’t say which of Paul’s letters was quoted; I don’t actually need to. In his sermon, Pastor Berwyn (not his name, but it’s what I’m calling him) expounded on what Paul had to say to all the sinners in our wicked world.

Except… was Paul writing to all the sinners of our wicked world? Or all the sinners of his wicked world?—namely the Roman Empire and its pagan practices. And maybe I should use the word “Pagan” with a capital P, because we’re not talking about today’s pagans, who lean monotheist thanks to the influence of Abrahamic religions: I’m talking old-school pagans, who believed in many gods, few of whom were good or moral or cared about humanity.

If you’ve read your bible, you’re fully aware every single one of Paul’s letters, whether written solo or with co-writers, was addressed to the Christians of various Roman Empire cities. And you’re fully aware every letter—the ones by James, Peter, John, Jude, and Luke—and all the gospels, were likewise written to Christians. The recipients and audience of the entire New Testament? Ancient Christians. And their posterity, which includes today’s Christians.

Not pagans. Not pagans then; not pagans now. Yep, even though we’ll give free bibles and gospels of John to pagans, in the hopes they’ll find Jesus in there: It wasn’t written to them.

Now, since the New Testament was written to ancient Christians, it stands to reason there are gonna be some things in it which dealt specifically with ancient Christian issues and problems. And for that, we gotta do a little historical research, and make sure we’re not borrowing the instructions about an ancient problem, and wrongly turning ’em into a current problem. (Like telling women they can’t speak in church.) Historical context is just as important.

Otherwise, the New Testament was written to Christians. Not pagans. And Paul’s instructions—and rebukes—are to Christians. Not the cold cruel world of the Roman Empire, nor the cold cruel world of the United States. He’s doing housekeeping. He’s trying to clean up the people who claim to follow Jesus. The people who make no such claims: They’re on their own. Ro 1.28-32 Till they repent.

If you ever hear a preacher angrily condemning the world… well, that’s gonna happen. Shouldn’t be done in anger, ’cause sinners aren’t gonna listen to an angry person; such preachers are speaking without love. (And don’t give me any rubbish about “tough love.” That’s just more anger.) But they’re gonna figure, “The Old Testament prophets did it; why can’t I?” and rant about it as much as they please, and maybe there’ll be some truth in it.

But if you’re claiming or implying the apostles did the same thing in the New Testament, you’d be wrong. You’re pulling the scriptures out of their context, and teaching your own bile instead of godly wisdom.

Praying exact prayers.

I haven’t heard this teaching in a mighty long time, but I heard it again recently: The preacher was informing her audience (and reminding her regular listeners) that whenever we pray for stuff, we gotta get really, precisely specific. We gotta tell God exactly what we want from him. Otherwise we might not get it. God might give us something which generally resembles what we want, but not exactly what we want. We weren’t clear.

Fr’instance let’s say you’re looking for a job. What you’d love to do is work at a bank, approving loans. But you ask God, “Please Lord, I’d like to work at a bank; any job will do.” And God answers that prayer! But your job at the bank is looking at the dark and blurry photos people send of checks through the bank’s app, and confirming they’re something the bank can actually cash. Hardly your dream job. But hey, God answered your prayer!—you just didn’t specify you didn’t wanna look at bad phone-camera photography eight hours a day.

Ergo we have to specify what we want. You know, kinda like you’re programming ChatGPT. You want the bot to output exactly what you want, without any surprises or errors? You gotta spell it out for it. It’s not that intelligent.

Now. If you’re in any way familiar with the Almighty, you know he’s not a moron like these “artificially intelligent” programs. If you know your bible, you can probably quote this verse from memory, or close enough:

Matthew 6.8 NRSVue

“Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him.”

That’s Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, explaining to his listeners, and to us Christians centuries later, that we don’t need to use many words and empty phrases with God. Mt 6.7 In context he was really talking about pagans who feel they need to call upon their gods with big, complicated incantations—and if they get the incantations wrong, maybe their gods won’t listen!

And y’know, it’s kinda what this preacher is suggesting God is like. That if we get our prayer wording wrong, maybe the LORD won’t listen, and we won’t get exactly what we ask for.

If you’ve heard this teaching before, I’m betting you heard it from the “name it and claim it” crowd. Every time I’ve heard it taught, it came from someone who’s been listening to their preachers, reading their books, and dabbling in their teachings. A number of ’em believe our words are so powerful, we can actually call things into existence. Same as God! Supposedly he’s granted us Christians the same power he has to create stuff. So we gotta be careful with those words, lest we create things we don’t actually want.

Because when we don’t get precise with our prayer requests, we might ask for the right thing, wrongly. And when we do this, God might grin, say, “Well you did ask for it,” and prankishly give us literally what we requested. And now we’re stuck with it.

Like the man in the joke who asked a genie for a million clams. By which he meant dollars—and somehow expected a genie, who shouldn’t even know English, to know American slang. But nope; the genie bestowed him with a million literal clams.

I don’t know what’s worse: Claiming God is as dumb as a chatbot, or God is some kind of prankster god like Cupid, Loki, or Coyote. I should hope you know he’s wiser, and has a far better character, than that. I should hope you know he’s generous, and is eager to bless us far more than we ask or think. Ep 3.20 I mean, they very idea God’s interested in playing dumb games with prayer, oughta offend us a little. It is blasphemy after all.

But if you're way more interested in getting your wishes granted, stands to reason you'll fall for this foolish advice.