Tag Archives: Bible Truth

Fruit of the Spirit-Love

22 Monday Mar 2021

Posted by in Fruit of the Spirit, Studies

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“But the Fruit of the Spirit is love…” Galatians 5:22

As I began this study, I wondered whether or not there was intention behind the order in which the Fruit of the Spirit is listed.  Was Paul, because he listed love first, saying it’s the most important?  In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul does say, “and now abide faith, hope, love, these three: but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Corinthians 13:13)   

While I was looking up the word “love” in my reference materials, I came across the following: “Love is the highest characteristic of God, the one attribute in which all others harmoniously blend.”1 I found I agreed as I considered the rest of the list in Galatians 5:22 & 23: the other Fruit of the Spirit were not a possibility without love and they did both blend with and flow out of love.  Perhaps Paul did deliberately list love first.

Jesus certainly considered love of highest importance.  He stressed its importance during the conversation that took place in the upper room.  “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.  By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.” (John 13:34-35)  “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you” and then again; “These things I command you, that you love one another” (John 15: 12 and 17, respectively).  What is this love He, and the writers of the New Testament, consider so important?

The Greek language does something I wish English did and that is it distinguishes between types of love.  There is eros or sexual love, there is storge for familial love or affection, there is philia to describe social love or friendship, philanthropia for a broader ethical sense of kindness and humanity, and then there is agape.2 While phileo (verb-John 16:27) and philanthropia (Titus 3:4) are used in connection with the love of God, it is agape (the noun) or agapeo (the verb) that are used most often.  Agape (G26) means love, affection, benevolence and agapeo (G25) means love in a social or moral sense. 

I don’t know about you, but these definitions from Strong’s Concordance don’t succeed in opening my eyes to the awesomeness of agape.  My reference materials do attempt to explain the meaning further.  Vine’s Expository Dictionary has “the characteristic word of Christianity…used to describe the attitude of God toward His son…the human race…and to such as believe on the Lord Jesus Christ…to convey His will to His children concerning their attitude toward one another…and toward all men…to express the essential nature of God.”3  The Hastings Dictionary says, “agape, signifying primarily a voluntary, active affection, has brought…into the NT the deeper sense of spiritual affection, the love that links God and man and unites soul and soul in the Divine communion.  Like philia, it implies reciprocity, fellowship,–if not existing, then desired and sought.”4 I liked the entry in Unger’s Bible Dictionary best: “We must derive our conceptions of God from the special revelation which he has given of Himself; and this declares His love as strongly as His existence.”5 I will come back to this in a moment.

1 John 4:8 states, “He who does not love (agapeo) does not know God for God is love (agape).  God is, in His very nature, love.  I have found value in reading the entries for love/agape in my reference materials but I find it is scripture itself that gives me the clearest picture of this love that God is.    

1 Corinthians 13 is one of the most spectacular passages in all of scripture. It explains agape. I cannot fathom why the translators of the King James Bible used “charity” to translate agape in this passage and yet translated it “love” elsewhere.  While other versions did make the correction back to “love”, I have heard this passage quoted with “charity” and I think that word sucks the vibrancy out of it. The passage is meant to be a joyous revelation of the very heart of God.  Let us take a look at it again keeping this in mind:

Love suffers long.  Love is kind.  Love does not envy.  Love does not parade itself.  Love is not puffed up.  Love does not behave rudely.  Love does not seek its own.  Love is not provoked.  Love thinks no evil.  Love does not rejoice in iniquity but rejoices in the truth.  Love bears all things.  Love believes all things.  Love hopes all things.  Love endures all things.  Love never fails. 

Again, “We must derive our conceptions of God from the special revelation which he has given of Himself; and this declares His love as strongly as His existence.” “Love had its perfect expression among men in the Lord Jesus Christ.”6 “He (Jesus) is the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15).  There are so many more commentaries, expositions, and scriptures I could quote if I had space.  I hope these few are enough for each one of us to see that perfect love that God is has been made manifest to us in His Son.  That love is the same love with which we are commanded to love each other.  Is this a burden placed upon us believers?  Are we to strive to love like Him and hope we don’t fall short?  Of course not!

The word “commandment” in the passages I quoted earlier is a fascinating one.  It is entole (G1785) meaning injunction, authoritative prescription, commandment, precept.  Entole comes from entellomai (G1781) which means enjoin, give charge, give commandments, injoin.  Entellomai can be broken down into its components and here’s where it gets extremely interesting.  I haven’t got the space to share the definitions in their entirety so I encourage you to look them up for yourself.  Briefly, the meanings are these:

En (G1722) denoting fixed position in place, time, or state…instrumentality…a relation of rest…give self wholly to

Telos (G5056) to set out for a definite point of goal, the conclusion of an act or a state, ultimate or prophetic purpose, an impost or levy (as paid)

Do you see it?  The onus isn’t on us at all except as it relates to our keeping ourselves in Him, entering into His rest, and remaining in vital relationship with Him through His Spirit!  God so LOVED-AGAPEO-the world that He gave His son and Jesus has done it all!  He is the One who has ascended far above all heavens that He might fill all things! (Ephesians 4:10)  We who hope to love as Jesus did know we can do so, not in our own strength but because “the love (agape) of God has been poured out into our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.” (Romans 5:5)  It is His Spirit in us that bears fruit and the beginning of this fruit is His love.

  1. Unger, Merrill, F., Unger’s Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, Moody Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1982, Page 668
  2. Hastings, James, Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, Fifth Printing, Hendrickson Publishers, USA, 2001, Page 555
  3. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee, 1997, Pages 692-693
  4. Hastings, James, Hastings Dictionary of the Bible, Hendrickson Publishers, USA, 2001, Page 555
  5. Unger, Merrill, F., Unger’s Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, Moody Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1982, Page 668
  6. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee, 1997, Page 693

Other References: The Comparitive Study Bible, Zondervan, 1984; The New King James Version of the Holy Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1982; The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990

Testing the Fruit

01 Monday Mar 2021

Posted by in Walking in the Way

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Photo by Kai-Chieh Chan from Pexels

This week, I find myself still in 1 John 4.  Specifically, his admonition in verse 1: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.”  I have seen stories of those claiming to be prophets and/or claiming to have received prophetic messages from God.  Statements made by these prophets have since turned out to be untrue.  No doubt I need look no further to see what John meant by false prophets. 

Here is where I find study important when I am attempting to understand scripture.  I bring whatever I believe a word means to scripture when I read it and this can be dangerous when I thus interpret the meaning of a passage.  Whenever I read the word “prophet” I know that means “someone who says what God is going to do in the future”.  A modern day prophet is someone like the Old Testament prophets but better because that person is (ought to be) spirit-filled.  Or, at least I assume I know because that’s how the word has been used and is thus the definition foremost in my mind when I read scripture but; is that really what the word means?  It is important to me that I know and so I turn to my Strong’s Concordance.

The Greek word translated “false prophet” is pseudoprophetes (S5578).  What’s cool about studying Greek is the words can be broken into parts and their meanings looked at.  Pseudoprophetes can be split into pseudes which means “untrue, i.e. erroneous, deceitful, wicked–false, liar” and prophetes (S4396) which, while it does mean “a foreteller (“Prophet”)” it also means “An inspired speaker, a poet;-prophet”.  Prophetes can be split into its parts of pro (S4253) and phemi (S5346).  Pro means “fore, i.e. in front of, prior to” and phemi means “to show or make known one’s thoughts”.  My trusty Vine’s Expository Dictionary has: “PROPHETES, one who speaks forth or openly, A), a proclaimer of a divine message…one to whom and through whom God speaks.”1  With just this bit of study, I see that a prophet can be but is not necessarily someone who foretells the purposes of God in the future.  Rather, anyone who stands up and claims to be speaking on behalf of God is a prophet which would include any teacher, pastor, writer, etc. 

I see this is so when I look at Hebrews 1:1-2 and Revelation 19:10.  The Hebrews passage says, “God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds” and the Revelation passage says, “…for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.”  It bears repeating: God speaking by His Son and the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.  To me, these scriptures say it isn’t just a prophet’s declaration of the future I need to be testing but also I need to be testing whatever is said by anyone claiming to speak on the word of God.  I sincerely hope my words are being subjected to the same test.  What test?

 For further clarification, I turn to the words of Jesus Himself.

In Matthew 7: 15-20, Jesus warns to beware of false prophets.  He says “you will know them by their fruits” in verse 16 and says it again in verse 20: “Therefore by their fruits you will know them.”  Jesus speaks about two kinds of fruit in this small passage.  “Do men gather grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles?” He asks and then continues, “Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit…every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire” (Matthew 7:16-17, 19).

How can there be both good fruit and bad fruit?  In the parable of the Vine and the branches recorded in the 15th chapter of John’s Gospel Jesus says, “As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it abides in the vine, neither can you, unless you aide in Me.”  To me, this says there’s fruit and no fruit, not good fruit and bad fruit.  Does Jesus contradict Himself?  Can both passages be true?

I find my answer to that is yes but only when I consider the life that flows from the vine to the branch in terms of the Holy Spirit.  There is Jesus and there is Me.  We are separate in a sense (We can’t ever be truly separate as in Him all things hold together as described in Colossians 1:17.  That’s a vast subject I don’t have space to address here).  And yet, His life is my life because His Spirit lives in me.  I am only aware of His life in me because the Spirit reveals it to me.  This is true of every believer so how can a believer bear bad fruit?  When I return to Matthew 7, Jesus says “I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you’.” (Verse 23). 

Intimacy with Jesus Christ is the answer.  When I realize I abide in Him, that apart from Him I can do nothing, that I need the flow of His Spirit every moment of my life, the fruit I bear will be good fruit.  If that flow is stifled or diminished somehow, I would still bear fruit but it would be shriveled, tasteless, perhaps rotten fruit.  I wonder if this is what the Apostle Paul meant when he said “do not quench the Spirit” in 1 Thessalonians 5:19. 

In the very next verse Paul says, “Do not despise prophecies.”  Prophecies are important.  Teachers of the Word are important.  Knowing the difference between good fruit and bad fruit is important.  Galatians 5: 22-23 tells me what the fruit of the Spirit is, “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.”  Here is an entire list of Spirit fruit I can taste for myself, savor, become familiar with as they become part of me.  It’s only by tasting the good fruit that comes from a life in the Spirit that I can recognize the taste of the bad fruit when it is served up to me.

  1. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson Inc., Nashville, Tennessee, 1997, Prophet, Page 894

Testing the Spirits-Part Two

22 Monday Feb 2021

Posted by in Walking in the Way

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Revelation 1:8 records Jesus saying, “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End…who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.”  J. Preston Eby has a teaching series on the Book of The Revelation of Jesus Christ called “From the Candlestick to the Throne” and Part Ten is entitled “Who Is and Was and Is to Come”.  In Part Ten, Mr. Eby shares a different interpretation of 1 John 4:1-4.  Mr. Eby begins in 1 John 2:22-23: “Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ?  He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.  Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father either; he who acknowledges the Son has the Father also.”  Mr. Eby states 1 John 4 is an elaboration of these verses and says:

“These verses have a deeper meaning!  They are not speaking of the fact of Jesus Christ having lived on earth as a man.  Almost anyone will admit that!  But the profound truth which all of popular religion has missed, is the fact of the Christ actually coming into this flesh, my flesh, your flesh, and becoming an eternal and inseparable part of us!  Millions confess Him who was, but very few in this dark age confess Him who is!…“…ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them (the antichrists): because GREATER IS HE THAT I-S IN YOU (your flesh), THAN HE THAT I-S IN THE WORLD” (I Jn. 4:3-4).”1

I had a bit of a knee-jerk reaction when I read this.  The spirit of Antichrist?  In churches?  In me?  Is such a thing possible?  Years ago I read studies on the book of Revelation which taught the Rapture and The Antichrist.  Further study had me looking at how John used the word “antichrist” in his letter and I learned it had to mean more than an Antichrist rising in the last days because there were already “many antichrists” when John wrote his letter (1 John 2:18).  There was nothing I could find that suggests John was writing about a period of time thousands of years in the future.  Therefore, he was aware of many antichrists at work while he was alive and writing and his letter makes clear how to recognize these spirits. 

I haven’t looked at, or really thought about these passages in 1 John in years; not until they surfaced in my mind after listening to the video.  This along with Mr. Eby’s interpretation made me think I need to take another look at what the spirit of antichrist really means and what John meant when he said to “test the spirits”.

The Dictionary of New Testament Theology says, “the prep. anti originally meant “in the place of” and then “against”.2   Another source stated: “Antichristos can mean either against Christ or instead of Christ, or perhaps, combining the two, “one who, assuming the guise of Christ, opposes Christ’ (Westcott)”3   Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament has, “Antichrist: it may mean one who stands against Christ or one who stands instead of Christ…John never uses the word pseudochristos false Christ. While the false Christ is merely a pretender to the Messianic office, the Antichrist “assails Christ by proposing to do or to preserve what He did while denying Him.”4

I looked up anti in my Webster’s and found: “Anti: a person opposed to some policy, proposal, action etc.,…opposed; against facing, opposite, near, against, hostile to 2. That counteracts, that operates against, 3. That prevents, cures, or neutralizes”.5   Unger’s Bible Dictionary says, “The Greek preposition ‘anti, in composition, sometimes denotes substitution, taking the place of another; hence, “false Christ.”  The connection in which the word is used appears to import opposition, covert rather than avowed, with a professed friendliness.”6

Mr. Eby also writes, “Would God that Christians could be awakened to the glory of Him who is!…Truly, Christ in us is our only hope of glory!  HE IS the glory!  But antichrist will hear of no such hope of glory.  His hope does not rest wholly in the Christ within, but in his own ability and works, his own faithfulness or endurance.  He is cluttered about with laws, regulations, creeds, ordinances, observances, rituals, ceremonies, programs, traditions, and religious exercises of this order and that, all of which are designed to assure his right standing with God.  He is thus denying the Father and the Son, for the living Christ alone is not his life!”7

I think I understand what Mr. Eby is saying and I cannot disagree.  I’ve experienced a neutralized Christian life inside religious systems.  I have been in places where I was offered “in the place of”: program involvement, more Bible reading, more prayer, etc.  I knew Jesus lived in me: He’d come into my heart when I first believed and said the sinner’s prayer.  I could rest assured I would escape judgement and hell and would go to heaven when I died.  Until then, I was to attend a church and, if my life was a barren, dusty, thirsty place…there wasn’t an answer for that.  Where were the fountains of living waters the Spirit was supposed to be to me?

I cannot remember attending a church where the message was Jesus is my life NOW!  Christ, in me, my hope of Glory!  I think the reason for that is I rarely heard about the Holy Spirit.  I’d been baptized in the Holy Spirit but now I was on my own.  Nobody taught me exactly why I’d been baptized in the Spirit except now I could pray in tongues and that’s how I was supposed to pray when I couldn’t think of my own words.  There had to be something more.  How I thank God for the discontent that drove me to keep searching for the life the writers of the New Testament insisted I could have, the life Jesus promised I could have!  No rules and regulations: relationship with the Father and Son through the Holy Spirit.  Eternal life.  (See John 17:3) 

Is this sidelining of the Holy Spirit the spirit of antichrist?  I don’t know.  I’ve always believed the spirit of antichrist was a deliberate denial of Jesus Christ and I never experienced that.  On the contrary; I knew earnest, seeking people who loved Jesus.  Only, no one seemed to expect anything in Christ beyond what we had.  It’s a subject I’ll have to study more but it does bring me to my third litmus test: what is being said about the Holy Spirit?  More specifically, what is being said about His work in the lives of believers NOW!  It is a sad fact but this third test is where I find I cannot follow a teacher.  In Galatians 5:25, Paul says, “If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.”  To which I add a resounding Amen.

  1. Eby, Preston J., Kingdom Bible Studies, From the Candlestick to the Throne, Who Is and Was and Is to Come, Part 10
  2. Brown, Colin, Dictionary of New Testament Theology Vol. 1., Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1975, Antichrist, Page 124
  3. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., Nashville, Tennessee, Pages 53-54
  4. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D., Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Hendrickson Publishers, Peabody, Massachusetts, 1 John, Page 337
  5. Guralnik, David B., Webster’s New World Dictionary of the American Language, Second College Edition, William Collins + The World Publishing company, 1976, Page 59 
  6. Unger, Merrill F., Unger’s Bible Dictionary, Third Edition, Moody Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1982, Page 68
  7. Eby, Preston J., Kingdom Bible Studies, From the Candlestick to the Throne, Who Is and Was and Is to Come, Part 10

Testing the Spirits-Part One

15 Monday Feb 2021

Posted by in Walking in the Way

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I listen to my favorite teachers and podcasts while I’m at work and, early last week, I listened to a YouTube video where another video was being discussed.  The other video was of a gentleman who was stating there was nowhere in the Bible where Jesus was called God.  I wasn’t paying much attention because I couldn’t fathom which version of the Bible this gentleman was reading in order to state a thing with such confidence.  Every version of the Bible I have available to me consists of the Old Testament which points to Jesus and the New Testament which reveals Jesus and tells me who I am in Him as well as who He is in me.  There is Jesus’ name: Yeshua in the Hebrew which means “He will save”.  There was Jesus’ not so subtle declaration in John 8: 58 where He says, “Before Abraham was I AM” using the Name God used when He revealed Himself to Moses.  There’s John 1:1-14 which is such a beautiful passage: I read and re-read and re-read it.  There are so many other specific scriptures I could list but the purpose of this post is not to convince anyone Jesus is God. (Except do read 1 Timothy 3:16!) I’m going to assume that, if you are reading this, you already declare Jesus is God from God, God manifest in the flesh, or are at the very least open to the possibility and I am going to get to my material point.

Which is: my ears perked up when I heard this same gentleman say he had the holy spirit which had shown him these things.  That arrested me and I mulled on it for days.  I, of course, do not agree the spirit teaching this man comes from God at all but there is no discounting his sincerity.  It took me quite a chunk of time to digest the irony of someone saying they have the holy spirit who has revealed Jesus is not God when 1, if Jesus is not God there is no possibility of the Holy Spirit and for this I point you to John Chapter 16.  The entire chapter is worth reading but for the sake of this post I am referencing verses 7-16.  And 2: if Jesus is not God made flesh, and assuming God still had a reason to pour His Spirit out on us humans, what would He say?  John 15:26: But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.”

And so, while I don’t believe this gentleman and I are hearing from the same spirit, how can I be certain?  Well, the Bible gives me guidelines.  There is 1 Corinthians 12:3 which states, “Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit.”  There is Romans 8:15-16 which state, “For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, “Abba, Father.”  The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God.”  There is 1 John 4 which popped into my head while I was listening to the video and verses 1-5 state; “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.  By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God.  And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.”

The Amplified has, “…prove (test) the spirits…By this you may know (perceive and recognize) the Spirit of God: every spirit which acknowledges and confesses [the fact] that Jesus Christ (the Messiah) [actually] has become man and has come in the flesh is of God [has God for its source]; And every spirit which does not acknowledge and confess that Jesus Christ has come in in the flesh [but would annul, destroy, sever, disunite Him] is not of God [does not proceed from Him].”

Francois du Toit expounds on disuniting Jesus in the Mirror Study Bible and it’s so great I have to share it.  Verse 3 and his commentary state: “No so-called “spiritual revelation” that fails to communicate the revelation of the incarnation of Jesus Christ, is of God.  This is the anti-Christ spirit that you have heard of and even now witness in the world.  Any idea that Jesus Christ is not the incarnate word of God does not originate in God but is the typical pseudo mindset of the spirit of this fallen cosmic system. (The Latin rendering from the 2nd century reads, “No spirit that would separate the human Jesus from the divine Christ, is of God.”)1

My Archeological Study Bible tells me John wrote this passage to refute Gnostic heresy and I found an interesting blurb on Gnosticism which I’ll quote parts of:

1 John 4.  Gnosticism was one of the earliest Christian heresies.  Gnostic writings are many and varied, frequently drawing upon Platonic concepts, imagery from the New Testament and pagan myth…Certain broad observations can be made of Gnostic literature.

  • From the Greek word gnosis meaning “knowledge”, Gnosticism was a movement that claimed to provide secret knowledge about God.  Its adherents considered the Biblical God, the Creator of the world, to be an inferior god.  In Gnostic teaching the material world was innately evil and thus its Creator a lesser deity.
  • The Gnostic Savior, rather than providing atonement for sin, brought the knowledge of humanity’s “true” divine origins, thus freeing people from their ignorance and enslavement to the material world.
  • Some Gnostics believed that “the Christ” (a kind of spiritual anointing or presence) came upon the man Jesus at his baptism and departed before his crucifixion—thus, that there was no lasting union of divine and human natures in Jesus.  In their view, the true Christ had no physical body. 
  • One particular brand of Gnostics, called “Docetists”, believed that Jesus was actually a divine spirit who only appeared to be physical: His body, they argued, was not truly flesh but was only an illusion.  First John 4:2 (“Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God) refutes this teaching.  Possibly those whom John countered were forerunners of the groups that later wrote Gnostic texts.

John’s warnings indicate that heresy can come in many forms, often in the guise of apostolic teaching.  Those who deny the humanity of Jesus are equally as heretical as those who deny his deity.  In addition, any doctrine that understands the created, material world to be intrinsically evil is dangerous and misguided.2

I find this so fascinating, especially in light of the idea of “Christ Consciousness” I see gaining momentum today.  I do not know if it’s “now more than ever” but certainly the necessity of testing, proving, and discerning the spirits if they be of God is just as important as it was when John wrote his letter.  Here are two of my three litmus tests:

  1.  Who is this person saying The Father is?
  2. Who is this person saying Jesus is?

My third litmus test is in regard to the Holy Spirit and, for that, I want to look at another interpretation of 1 John 4 I found.  I plan to share that next week.

To be continued…

  1.  du Toit, Francois, Mirror Study Bible, Francois du Toit, 2012, Page 473. “Scripture taken from THE MIRROR. Copyright © 2012.  Used by permission of The Author.” 
  2. Archaeological Study Bible, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2005, “The Reliability of the Bible: The Gnostics and their Scriptures”, Page 2029

Being Nonconformist

01 Monday Feb 2021

Posted by in Personal Essays, Writing

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

My Mom and I were talking about bargains.  I love a bargain. In fact, I rarely make a purchase unless it is a bargain. I was re-thinking a purchase I didn’t make because it was an excellent deal but it was something I did not need. Just because something is a bargain doesn’t mean the money needs to be spent. 

My Mom agreed and told a story about her father receiving several pairs of silk socks one Christmas: a bargain his mother could not pass up.  My grandfather hated these socks.  Mom said he thought they were uncomfortable and his feet sweat in them something terrible.  Whatever his mother paid for them was too much.  Which got me thinking…

Does anyone remember the silk shirt fashion trend?  This had to be late 80s early 90s.  Everyone was wearing them and I wanted one so badly.  I don’t remember if I saved my allowance or talked my mother into purchasing one for me but there came the day I found myself the possessor of a dark teal silk shirt.  How proud I was of it!  What a beautiful color!  How wonderful I would now fit in with all the IT people who had their own silk shirts!  How I hated this shirt every time I wore it! 

There was not enough antiperspirant in the world to keep my armpits from sweating in this shirt.  I was anxious every time I wore my coveted silk shirt, certain that I was going to end up with large wet spots under my arms.  I don’t remember if I ever did raise my arms in that shirt.  I do know I didn’t wear it more than a handful of times.

What a waste of money that was.  What an awful fashion trend.  Remembering got me wondering…was everyone else having the same experience?  Did silk shirts become a fashion trend because everyone was looking at everyone else wearing them and, too embarrassed to admit to excessive sweating, endured?  Perhaps everyone else loved their shirts and it was only me who experienced the sweating.  If so, it begs the question: why did I ever wear that shirt more than once?  Was my desire to fit in so overwhelming I was willing to endure discomfort?  The sad truth is yes, it was. 

The way of fitting in has always escaped me.  I tried fixing my hair like the popular girls, wearing the same clothes, trying to understand what they liked and talked about and it never worked.  I think I’ve managed to misplace most of the photos from that era!  I still can’t think of the words “spiral perm” without wincing.  I never got the fashions quite right.  It is a truth I must still acknowledge that what looks adorable on another woman will not look the same on me.  I am always ever too something and it doesn’t fit right.  I also acknowledge my personal taste never quite conforms.  I can’t count how many times I left my house thinking I’d finally nailed it only to arrive at school and learn no, I had not.  

I am now a mature woman who has found my identity in Christ.  I am comfortable in my skin and my clothes and I thank Jesus for that.  I also thank Him that I can look back on what were painful experiences at the time and see that there is a lesson to be learned from them. 

Romans 12:2 says, “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”  It might surprise you to know that the Greek word translated “world” here is not kosmos (Strong’s G2889) which means “orderly arrangement or decoration” and is the word translated “world” most often in the New Testament.  Nor is it oikoumene (Strong’s G3625) which means “land, the terrene part of the globe, earth”.  No, the word translated “world” in this passage is aion (Strong’s G165) and means “an age”.  What’s the difference?

Vine’s Expository Dictionary says kosmos is “primarily order, arrangement, ornament, adornment and is used to denote the earth…the universe owing to the order observable in it…the human race…the sum of temporal possessions.”  Oikomene “is used of the whole inhabited world” and aion is “an age, a period of time, marked in the N.T. usage by spiritual or moral characteristics…details concerning the world in this respect; its cares…its sons…its rulers…its wisdom…its fashion…its character”1  The entry also states “Aion is always to be distinguished from kosmos, even where the two seem to the express the same idea” and gives the example of Ephesians 2:2: …where you once walked after the course (aion) of this world (kosmos).2

What defines the age Paul admonishes me not to be conformed to in his letter to the Romans?  I do not think I am mistaken to say it is a way of thought because after telling me to “be not conformed” Paul says “be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.”  In other letters, Paul tells us to “let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus (Philippians 2:5) and to “be renewed in the spirit of your mind (Ephesians 4:23)”. 

I have found that the rules of school followed me into adult hood.  Not that the clothes I wear are of utmost importance-though that is still a thing-but; if I want to fit in, if I want to belong, I must conform to an acceptable way of thought.  Perhaps I’m straining a metaphor but the thoughts of this age fit me like that silk shirt.  Maybe everyone else is comfortable in it but I am not and I am not the same person willing to suffer anxiety and endure discomfort so that I can fit in with everyone else.  My desire is no longer focused on fitting in.  I want to know Jesus.  I want to explore the vastness of my inheritance in Him, I want to live His life, and I want to think His thoughts.  All of this is possible for me because He has placed His Spirit within me.

The renewing of my mind In Christ is not always comfortable but He is always safe.  I imagine the word-picture painted in the story of the Husbandman in the 15th chapter of John.  There are necessary prunings and they can be painful but He does not seek to destroy me because I don’t conform to His way of thinking.  Rather, every work in my life makes me more the Me I was always intended to be and thus I am transformed into his way of thinking.  So, I live.  Yet, not I.  It is Christ who lives in me.  It’s a wondrous, glorious, awesome mystery.

And, if Isaiah 61:10 and Colossians 3:12 are any indication, I’ll be wearing some pretty cool garments.

  1. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, 1997, Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson Publishers, World, Pages 1245-1246
  2. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, 1997, Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson Publishers, World, Page 1246

The Letter of the Word

18 Monday Jan 2021

Posted by in Hebrew Words, Studies

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

As I have progressed in my relationship with Jesus, I have found my study habits changing.  I suppose such a thing ought to be obvious but I noticed the change and have wondered at it.  For example, I no longer do those “Read the Bible in a Year” plans.  I do not say there is anything wrong with them.  I have enjoyed making my way through different plans-sometimes historical, sometimes chronological, and seeing different patterns emerge.  And yet, there were times when I would read a particular scripture and it would spark something in me.  I would think about taking time to study it but I could not as I had my plan to adhere to.  I would promise myself to come back to it but another year meant another plan and I didn’t have a great deal of time to devote to one scripture.

I don’t do that anymore.  Now, if I see something I sink down into that passage until the Holy Spirit directs my attention to another.  This happened during my study of John 3:5.  I wrote in a previous post how scripture references and commentaries in my different Bible translations and study materials drew my attention to Ezekiel 36: 25-27.  I commenced a word study on those verses and such vistas opened it was difficult not to travel down some of these new paths and to stay focused on what I was attempting to learn about John 3:5.  While I do not think I am finished with John 3:5 either, I’m ready to take a look at some of these trails I’ve never been down and see what I find.

I was curious about the Hebrew word used for “give” as in “I will give you a new heart”.  The word translated “put” in some of my translations (like the NKJV) as in “I will put a new spirit within you” is the same Hebrew word translated “give” only a few words before.  I wondered if it might not contain the idea of birthing but it does not.  The word is nathan: number 5414 in my copy of The New Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.  There is a rather long entry for nathan and it’s worth reading through.  In sum, translating nathan as “give” is an accurate translation. 

Now, I find my Strong’s an invaluable resource but there are times merely looking up the Greek and Hebrew and getting a definition is a bit of a let down.  I have other dictionaries and commentaries which can be helpful and I have a Hebrew lexicon coded with Strong’s numbers and arranged so the word and its root are listed together along with every scripture the word is found.  Reading the word in other passages and seeing how it’s used is helpful but I can’t help wondering whether that is all I can learn.

Fortunately, I have a book called The Inner Meaning of the Hebrew Letters by Robert M. Haralick and I have Google.  With these two resources, I am introduced to a world where the Hebrew letters themselves have forms and final forms and meanings that help to show me who God is.

Take nathan: it is written nun, tav, and nun in its final form.  Before I make it passed the Table of Contents in Mr. Haralick’s book, I see that Nun means Emergence and Tav means True Law.  I find that fascinating.  Ezekiel 36:27 says “I will put (nathan) my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.”  In looking at the first two letters of nathan I see God at work.  Emergence = He puts or gives and True Law = we walk in his statutes, keep His judgments, and do them.  It’s with a sense of excitement and anticipation that I read the entries for these letters.

Mr. Haralick begins his entry for nun by stating “The fourteenth letter of the Hebrew alphabet is nun spelled nun-vav-nun.” (I’ve used English spelling-Mr. Haralick uses the Hebrew letters)  He goes on to say that in Aramaic, the word nun means fish while in Hebrew the word is the root to sprout, spread, propagate, or shine.  I am not unfamiliar with the word nun as I’ve read many times “Joshua, the son of Nun” and Mr. Haralick goes on to say, “Every instance of the word nun (spelled nun-vav-nun) in the Pentateuch is in the phrase “son of Nun”.  He includes the scripture references in his footnotes but reviews Deuteronomy 31:23, 1:38, and 34:9 concluding, “That which is in emergence does not immediately accomplish what is to be accomplished for what is to be accomplished takes place later in time.  It is the son of Nun, Joshua, the offspring of Nun, who goes into the land and causes us to inherit it.  The father, Nun, emergence, does not go into the Promised Land.  Therefore, when we are engaging in emergence we are charged to be strong and of good courage for it will take time for our emergence to produce something seeable.  And in emerging, we shall be full of the spirit of wisdom.”  

There are pages more information on nun, its cognates, how its meaning affects other words it is part of, and what its numerical value means.  I also found an online resource (lightedway.org) which has a study on nun so, once again, I find looking into the meaning of anything, even a letter, is no small undertaking.

For now though, I have to pause and reflect on the bit I’ve shared.  I see a picture of Jesus in Mr. Haralick’s words.  Our inheritance, our Promised Land if you will, is in Him.  He is the one that brings us to the Father and restores the relationship.  He is Yeshua, He who saves; the one who brings us into the Holy of Holies through Himself.  He is the one who puts in His life in us yet we do not immediately experience His fullness but rather, are transformed into His image from glory to glory (2 Corinthians 3:18).  We can be strong and of good courage because we know that He who began a good work in us will complete it in the day of Jesus Christ (Philippians 1:6).

To Him be the glory unto the Age of the Ages.  Amen.

I drew my last paragraph from the following scriptures:  Hebrews 10:20, Colossians 1:27, John 14:6, Ephesians 1:11-17, Romans 6:23, 2 Corinthians 5:19, and James 1:17

Quotes taken from:

Haralick, Robert M., The Inner Meaning of Hebrew Letters, Jason Aronson Inc. Northvale, New Jersey, 1995, pages 207-208

From Whence I Came

28 Monday Dec 2020

Posted by in Gospel and Letters of John, Studies

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I had planned for this week’s post to close out on my study of John 3:5 but I find there is an interpretation of “born of water” I would be remiss if I didn’t address.  That interpretation is the one that states being born of water is in reference to our physical birth.  I had personally discounted this interpretation because I had no found no scripture using “born of water” to mean physical birth.  I had found “born of a woman” but never “born of water”.  I had looked at various blog posts that discounted this interpretation but was looking up my scripture reference in the Mirror Study Bible and saw that John 3:5 was translated as “unless someone is born out of water (the womb) and Spirit, there would be no possible connection with the realm of God!” 1 

When I first started this series and was talking it over with my mother, she said she’d always thought being born of water meant physical birth because of the rush of water that announces an imminent birth.  She had been taught so in her church.  While I personally have never heard this interpretation, I’ve also never heard a sermon on John 3:5 so don’t have any idea how prevalent this interpretation might be.  And so, in the interests of being thorough, I am going to take a look at the possibility that being born of water is referencing the physical birth.

At first glance, this interpretation appears obvious.  Nicodemus does ask how it’s possible for a grown man to return to the womb and Jesus does reply with “that which is born of flesh is flesh” (John 3:6).  The Mirror Study Bible translates John 3:6 as, “Whatever originates out of flesh is flesh; but what is sourced in Spirit is spirit” and then has the following commentary: “The Message says, when you look at a baby, it’s just that: a body you can look at and touch.  But the person who takes shape within is formed by something you can’t see and touch—the Spirit”.

Let us continue in the Mirror Study Bible for two more verses.  John 3:7; “Don’t be so surprised when I say to you [manity – plural!] You couldn’t get here in the flesh unless you got here from above! (See John 1:10 These are the ones who discover their genesis in God beyond their natural conception!  This is not about our blood lineage or whether we were a wanted or an unwanted child – this is about our God-begotteness; we are his dream come true!  We are not the invention of our parents! [You are the greatest idea God has ever had!]) John 3:8; We can observe the effect the wind has and hear its sound whenever it touches objects – yet those objects do not define the wind; it comes and goes of its own accord – if life was not born out of the spirit in the first place, it would not be possible to detect spirit influence at all!  We are spirit-compatible by design! (Spirit is our origin!  Not our mother’s womb!…) 

This confuses me a bit.  What is Mr. du Toit saying here?  Is he saying while the Spirit is our true origin, we must be born into a physical body in order to-he says have a possible connection but other translations say see, enter-the Kingdom of God?  If so, I have a massive question I must lay before my Heavenly Father.  What about all the children who don’t make it through the birth process?

While seeking an answer in scripture to that question, I found I had to ask another: when does life begin?  I’ve heard various people say life begins at birth and others say it begins at conception.  What does the Bible say?  The Bible appears to share a truth so massive my mind can hardly fathom it.  The Writer of the Book of Hebrews, in talking about the Priesthood of Melchizedek, says it is a higher priesthood than that of Levi because “even Levi, who receives tithes, paid tithes through Abraham, so to speak, for he was still in the loins of his father when Melchizedek met him” (Hebrews 7:9-10) This scripture suggests Levi was alive in his great-grandfather decades before his physical birth.  And yet, there is a scripture that takes all of humanity’s origins back further than Abraham because “as in Adam all die” (1 Corinthians 13:22).  The first human made a choice that affected every one of his descendants.  It affected me so I had to be in Adam all those millennia before my actual birth.

The Bible does make clear the fact that God knew us before our physical birth.  God says to Jeremiah, “before I formed you in the womb I knew you: Before you were born I sanctified you” (Jeremiah 1:5).  One of my favorite Psalms contains a passage that echoes God’s words to Jeremiah: “You formed my inward parts: You covered me in my mother’s womb…my frame was not hidden from you…you saw my substance, being yet unformed.  And in your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me, when as yet there were none of them.” (Psalm 139: 13-16) The Gospel of John says “All things were made through Him and without Him nothing was made that was made.”  Consider Colossians 1:16: “For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers.  All things were created through Him and for Him.”  Ephesians 1:4-5 says “Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the pleasure of His will”.   

When I meditate on these scriptures, especially Colossians and Ephesians, I think I have not yet begun to fathom my origin.  Regarding John 3:5, I do not agree that “born of water” means a physical birth and then being born of the Spirit is the being born again.  In fact, the Greek word that has been translated again is anothen (G509) and would have been translated more accurately as from above, or anew.  (I’ve addressed this here) I believe born of water and the spirit were meant to explain being born anew and conducting this study has convinced me that the being born from above has nothing to do with water baptism.  Do I think a human has to be born physically and live some time on this earth in order to be then born into the Kingdom of God?

I do think this human existence is of immense value.  I think every life matters to God in a way we humans don’t understand unless His Spirit opens our eyes.  I know death is an enemy but one that is defeated by Jesus Christ (see 1 Corinthians 15, Revelation 1:18) therefore I do not believe the death of this body in some way thwarts God.  I do know that “in the dispensation of the fullness of the times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth-in Him.” The Amplified Bible puts it beautifully: “For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. (For all things originate with Him and come from Him; all things live through Him, and all things center in and tend to consummate and to end in Him.) To Him be glory forever!  Amen (so be it). (Romans 11:36)

Amen.

To be continued…

  1. “Scripture taken from THE MIRROR. Copyright © 2012. Used by permission of The Author.”

Back to Part Six

Continue to Part Eight

The Cleansing Word

21 Monday Dec 2020

Posted by in Gospel and Letters of John, Studies

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

In The Grammar of Complexity, I shared the idea that “born of water and the spirit” from John 3:5 means being born of the Word of God and the Spirit of God.  I believe this interpretation because of my personal experience, a baptism story I find in the Book of Acts, and various scriptures throughout the New Testament. First things First.  I have been the recipient of an immersion baptism and it happened like this:

It was only a few years after my devastating car accident.  I’d moved here to Colorado and was feeling somewhat adrift.  What was I supposed to do when the planned on college degree was no longer an option and I still had yet to figure out what being differently-abled really meant?  One of my mother’s old friends came into town to attend a conference given by an evangelist she liked and invited me to go along.  I did so and ended up receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit.  I attended the church that had hosted the evangelist and was a regular attendee for close to two years before I was baptized.  I did it all backwards if water baptism is supposed to be part of the new birth.  The word in seed form had been planted in me throughout my childhood by various teachers at various times and was sinking roots and growing even though it often times didn’t feel like it, then I was baptized in the Holy Spirit, and finally was baptized in water.  That water baptism was my declaring a change that had already taken place and my commitment to the new life that had been birthed in me.

I imagine you saying, “I’m not concerned with the experience of some random person.  Experience does not theology make.”  I agree which is why I turn your attention to Acts Chapter 10.  There is a fascinating story here about a centurion named Cornelius.  No one among the apostles was looking to baptize Cornelius.  The entire chapter shows God at work bringing about what He wanted.  I encourage you to read it: it’s a wonderful chapter.

In brief, Cornelius was fasting when an angel of God appeared to him and told him to send for Peter.  The angel told Cornelius what city Peter was in and who he was lodging with before departing.  Cornelius sends two from his household in the company of one of his soldiers who, it appears, was also a believer.  They go to Joppa to get Peter and bring him to Cornelius.  While they are traveling, Peter has the great vision of the sheet bound at the four corners descending from heaven filled with all sorts of animals and creatures he’d been forbidden to eat.  The command came from God to kill and eat to which Peter strenuously objected and then came the reply; “What God has cleansed you must not call common.”  This happens three times and then the sheet is taken up to heaven.

While Peter is wondering what his vision means, the Spirit tells him there are some men seeking him.  He goes down to Cornelius’ men, hears why they have come, and the next day he and some of the brethren return with them.  Meanwhile, Cornelius has called together his relatives and close friends in anticipation of Peter’s arrival.  Peter arrives and explains why he came and Cornelius shares his vision.  Peter begins preaching the word that is Jesus coming, crucified, and resurrected and something amazing happens.  The Holy Spirit falls on everyone who heard the word.  The brethren that came with Peter were amazed because the Holy Spirit had been poured out on Gentiles and I imagine a great part of their amazement was because most of these Gentiles were Romans.  It is after this, the word preached and the Holy Spirit poured out, that Cornelius and his household are baptized. 

The lack of water baptism was no hindrance to God.  A metanoia had already happened in Cornelius and how I wish it was described in scripture!  Imagine a man growing up in the Ancient Roman world with its myriad gods coming to know the true God of Jacob.  How did that happen?  I can only imagine.  God Himself had Cornelius send for someone to preach the word to him and his household, then came the outpouring in the Holy Spirit, and then baptism.  It’s all backwards, if indeed water baptism has anything to do with being born again.

In 1 Corinthians 1, Paul addressed some contentions that seem to have arisen due to who had baptized whom. Paul says, “for Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel” (verse 17).  I am convinced that if “born of water” meant water baptism, and that NOT being baptized in water was serious enough that a person could not enter the kingdom of God (John 3:5), Paul’s ministry to the Gentiles would have looked very different.

In closing this week’s post, I wish to share a few scriptures:

Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth, that we might be a kind of first-fruits of His creatures. James 1:18

Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him.  1 John 5:1

Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart, having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever. 1 Peter 1:22-23

Husbands, love your wives as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word. Ephesians 5:25-26

For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, “’This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days,’ says the Lord: ‘I will put My laws into their hearts and in their minds I will write them’ (Jeremiah 31:33), then He adds, ‘Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more’” (Jeremiah 31:43). Now where there is remission of these, there is no longer an offering for sin.  Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh, and having a High Priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.  Hebrews 10:14-22

To be continued…

Scriptures taken from the New King James Version

Back to Part Five

Continue to Part Seven

A New Heart

07 Monday Dec 2020

Posted by in Gospel and Letters of John, Studies

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Conducting a word study on a passage is an undertaking most fascinating.  Sometimes, as I trace the words to their roots in the original language, a picture forms that makes the scripture leap off the page.  Other times, while the original meaning doesn’t reveal anything surprising, the words usage-or lack thereof-in other scriptures proves to be fascinating.  Such proved to be the case with my word study on Ezekiel 36: 25-27.

A quick recap: I decided on the word study when I was referred back to this passage by several different sources I used in my study of John chapter 3.  I found it fascinating that both the sources that assured me that the “born of water” in John 3:5 did mean water baptism as well as those that assured me it did not referenced me back to Ezekiel 36.  I decided to see for myself.

I do try not to undertake any study with preconceived ideas as to the meaning of scripture.  This is not easy as I have been a Christian all of my life and still find I carry ideas picked up from my church going days that are based on a doctrinal tradition rather than scripture.  The Holy Spirit is steadily rooting those out but, during this study, I caught myself mentally linking scriptures together that do not necessarily mean what I think they mean.

What do I mean?

It’s probably obvious by now that I do lean towards the interpretation that “born of water” does not mean water baptism but does, rather, mean an inward working of Jesus through the Holy Spirit.  (See last week’s post)  My study of Ezekiel 36: 25-27 seemed to bear this out.  God does say He “will sprinkle clean water” and “will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.”  Despite this, I do think it’s a stretch to infer water baptism from this passage and even more of a stretch to think Jesus would have expected Nicodemus to make the association.  There is no mention of the ritual cleansing established in the law in all of chapter 36. The cleansing mentioned in my study scriptures is an intention of God and comes from the hand of God.  Verse 22 states “I do not do this for your sake, O house of Israel, but for My holy name’s sake…” John’s baptism was to the repentance of sins and I intend to go into this in more depth next week.  Suffice for this post, the Greek word translated repentance is metanoia (G3341) and means a change of mind1.  Important, necessary, but I do not see how such a baptism is synonymous with Jesus’s expounding on what it means to be born anew in John 3:5.  I am becoming convinced such a thing is a work of God inside of us rather than an outward immersion in water and these verses in Ezekiel seem to make this clear. However, I am not interested in bending scripture to support my own conviction:  I want to know the truth and am open to my word study showing me otherwise.

It didn’t do so. Verse 26 states “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you.”  Here I find that same dual action of God described in John 3:5.  I was so excited!  “I get it!” I exclaimed to myself and my mind was flooded with other scriptures.  This is what metanoia must look like because Proverbs 23:7 says “as he thinks in his heart so is he” so this change in heart would of course result in a change of mind.  And then, thought I, Matthew 5:1 says “blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God” and I just bet that “See God” in this passage is the same as “See the Kingdom of God” in John 3:5. 

I do not wish to get into an argument over translations of the Bible, i.e. which is better/more accurate/most useful.  What I do wish to say here is that, just because a translator used the same English words in different passages, does not mean they are the same words in the original languages.  The words translated “see” in these two passages in the King James Version are not the same in the Greek.  The Hebrew word translated “heart” in my study scriptures is not the same as the Hebrew word translated “heart” in Proverbs 23:7.  Does this mean I am wrong in my assumptions?  Not necessarily.  What it does mean is that there are layers of meanings in these scriptures not immediately evident when I read them in English and are thus worthy of more study.  It also shows me how important it is to lay aside all my preconceived notions and focus only on what’s in the text.  It is supremely exciting to see that there is something new to discover.  Word studies do feel a bit like unearthing buried treasure.

And so, what treasures did I find in Ezekiel 36: 25-27?  As I conducted my study, I couldn’t help verses from Psalm 51 from coming to mind.  On a whim, I took a look at the words for “clean”, “heart”, and “spirit” in Psalm 51:10 and compared them to the same words in Ezekiel.  They were, each one, the same Hebrew.  Perhaps such a thing ought to be obvious but, since I found other Hebrew words translated “clean”, “heart”, and even “spirit” in other passages, I thought it best to verify. 

Do you know Psalm 51:10?  “Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me.”  This is a cry of David’s heart after the fiasco with Bathsheba.  It has been the cry of my heart many times.  As my study unfolded, it seemed to me that the promise of God in Ezekiel 36 was in answer to David’s plea in Psalm 51.  David cries out for a clean heart and right spirit and God promises a new heart and spirit.  Indeed, He promises His spirit (verse 27).

That’s all well and good, I imagine some of you saying, but what does that have to do with the material point?  Not a thing.  Nothing in this study led me to the conviction that these verses in Ezekiel ought to have suggested the water baptism being performed by John to the mind of Nicodemus. Still, I find I cannot unequivocally say that “born of water” in John 3:5 does not mean baptism.  There is still study I need to perform.

To be continued…

  1. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old & New Testament Words, 1997, Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 952.  

Back to Part Three

Continue to Part Five

Born of Water

16 Monday Nov 2020

Posted by in Gospel and Letters of John, Studies

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

I began a word study on John 3:16 over the weekend because I have been thinking about the phrase “familiarity breeds contempt”.  While I don’t feel contempt for scripture-far from it!-I have been thinking about certain verses and how familiarity with them can definitely breed complacency.  This is especially true with John 3:16.  I can’t count how many times I’ve heard it quoted and have quoted it myself.  It can be found on t-shirts, hats…it is one of the most widely known verses in the Bible.  With this in mind, I asked myself: am I sure I know what this verse is saying?  Can I be certain I know what it means?  That answer is, of course, no: the Holy Spirit always has something more to reveal.  And so, I started a word study on John 3:16.

I begin any study on scripture with a prayer to the Holy Spirit to open the eyes of my understanding and then I open my Comparative Study Bible and reference books.  I use many references when doing a word study.  I want to know as much as I can about how the word I’m looking at was used elsewhere in scripture, how was it used in the vernacular of the day, and what interpretations there have been by other teachers past and present.  I started with looking up the words in both the Strong’s and Young’s concordances and then took a look at the commentaries I have.  While I did find a few interesting things I hope to share at a later time, my attention was diverted off my selected verse.  I’d prayed about John 3:16 but the Holy Spirit turned my attention to a word study I’d done a few months ago on baptism.  The teacher during Sunday morning’s Zoom church message spoke about the beauty of baptism which made me realize I needed to take a second look at that previous study.  Thus, this post will not be about John 3:16 but rather John 3:5.  Again, I expected one answer from God and He pointed me toward something else. 

I’d first done the study on John 3:5 because of a social media post I’d seen talking about the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist.  I didn’t disagree with anything the post had said about the importance of baptism and the Eucharist but I wasn’t sure I agreed that baptism was the subject of John 3:5.  Curious, I did a word study, made some notes, and then put them aside until last night when I picked up one of my reference books.  Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament said “That water points definitely to the rite of baptism and that with a twofold reference-to the past and to the future.  Water naturally suggested to Nicodemus the baptism of John which was then awakening such profound and general interest; and, with this, the symbolical purifications of the Jews, and the Old Testament use of washing as the figure of purifying from sins”.  The scriptures listed by Dr. Vincent for reference are Psalms 51:2&7, Ezekiel 36:25, and Zechariah 13:11. 

Psalms 51:2 states “Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin” while verse 7 says “Purge me with hyssop that I shall be clean: wash me and I shall be whiter than snow.”  Zechariah 13:1: In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.”  The Amplified Bible has Ezekiel 36:25-27 as a reference scripture for John 3:5 so I’m including the passage in its entirety rather than merely verse 25: “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleanness: and from all your idols will I cleanse you.  A new heart will I give you and a new spirit will I put within you, and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.  And I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you shall heed My ordinances and do them.”

I wholeheartedly agree these scriptures speak of a cleansing that comes from the hand of God; a washing for which immersion was symbolic.  I also wholeheartedly agree Nicodemus was aware of John the Baptizer.  Doctor Vincent says as much and references the sending of priests and Levites to question him as related in John 1:19-282. The statement I question is “water naturally suggested to Nicodemus the baptism of John”.  Dr. Vincent says “Jesus’ words opened to Nicodemus a new and more spiritual significance in both the ceremonial purifications and the baptism of John which the Pharisees had rejected (Luke 7:30) John’s rite had a real and legitimate relation to the kingdom of God which Nicodemus must accept3.” 

Very well.  That sounds plausible.  Except, Nicodemus is still confused.  He asks in John 3:9, “how can all this be possible?” Nicodemus was missing something and I seem to be missing it too.  It got me wondering: if Jesus meant baptism, why didn’t he say baptism? 

Turning to the Greek words, “Water” in John 3:5 does mean “water”(Strong’s reference G5204) and “born” carries the definition of “to procreate, regenerate, be born, bring forth (G1080).  There is nothing here about baptism.  The word translated baptize in other scriptures does not appear anywhere in the chapter and is not, in fact, a word that has been translated at all.  The Strong’s reference number is G907 and the word is baptizo.  It would have been very simple for this passage to clearly say baptism if indeed baptism is what Jesus meant.

Why is this important to me?  Let me share verse 5 in the Amplified Bible:  “Jesus answered, I assure you, most solemnly I tell you, unless a man is born of water and (even) the Spirit, he cannot (ever) enter the kingdom of God.”  This is a serious statement.  It’s of solemn importance I understand what this means.  All I know for certain at this time is that small word study I did months ago did not go nearly deep enough.

I will continue this study next week.

  1. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D., Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, Gospel of John Chapter 3:5. Born of Water and the Spirit, Page 91
  2. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D.,Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, Gospel of John Chapter 3:2. Rabbi, Page 89
  3. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D., Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, Gospel of John Chapter 3:5. Born of Water and the Spirit, Page 91

Continue to Part Two