Tag Archives: Christian Life

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

Fruit of the Spirit-Introduction

15 Monday Mar 2021

Posted by in Fruit of the Spirit, Studies

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

My blog counter ticked over 100 followers!  Thank you. 

It has also been a year since I decided to start blogging again.  I wasn’t sure what I was going to blog about but, like Jeremiah, words burned inside of me and I couldn’t hold them in (Jeremiah 20:9).  I spent a great deal of time in prayer before deciding to return to blogging because it was then and still is important to me that any words I write be ones My Father would have me write.  I have sought the leading of the Holy Spirit and, I mention it in my bio but am stating it here; this blog has not gone according to plan.  At least, not my plan.  My prayer continues to be that the Holy Spirit guides me and that each post will be only ever what He would have me write.

To that end: I am initiating a new study series on the Fruit of the Spirit.  I did not intend to.  I planned a series on the Epistle to the Hebrews.  I would also like to do a post on the Hittites!  I am certain each of my readers is just as fascinated as I am with ancient world cultures. 😉 One day, perhaps, if Father wills it so.  As that time is not now, I will be devoting the next several weeks to the Fruit of the Spirit listed in Galatians 5:22-23: “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control”.

What do I hope to achieve by this study?  A greater understanding of the Holy Spirit.  A greater understanding of what His work in my life looks like.  I want this fruit to come to maturity in my life.  The list is an incredible one.  I am awed if I pick just one and stare at it.  For example, peace.  Is it possible to have peace in my life when I am in the midst of such upheaval?  Yes, it is.  More than that, peace is not something I have.  To clarify: it is something I have because I do not have it in myself but it is not some attribute outside of me I have to somehow lay hold of.  What I want this study to cement for me is that I have peace because peace is a person.  I have peace because I have Jesus who is my peace and I partake of the peace He is because of the Holy Spirit living in me.  Therefore, I do not seek to get peace.  Rather, I seek to come to rest in the knowledge that One who is peace lives in me and I live from Him.

It has been seventeen, maybe eighteen years (time starts to run together a bit for me) since dissatisfaction with the state of my spiritual life caused me to go to my mother and say, “I want to learn more about the Holy Spirit.”  She wanted that as well and so we started…where to start?  What is the Holy Spirit?  I had a few answers from my church-going background.  He’s the Third Person of the Trinity.  What does that mean?  Here’s where answers would get hazy and vague.  As I listened to those who ought to know attempt to tell me about the Holy Spirit, I couldn’t help but get the idea he was a great deal like the Force: He was everywhere and He was power.  I learned nothing that helped me.

I find Him so very interesting as I look back:  my mother and I expressed a wish to learn more about the Holy Spirit and within a few weeks a friend shared with us a series of writings that blew our tiny religious worlds apart.  Within a few more months, I had experienced a crisis that left my life hanging in tatters.  I was devastated.  I didn’t know what to believe or if, indeed, I believed anything at all.  It was at once a horrendous and wonderful place to be in because I discovered the Holy Spirit.  I say “discovered” but it really isn’t like that at all.  I suppose it’s more accurate to say He opened my eyes to see Him.  To know Him.

In the midst of my shambles, I learned He was everything Jesus promised He would be in the 14th Chapter of John’s gospel.  He revealed Himself as Comforter.  He was so gentle with my broken heart.  He didn’t turn from me because I’d made mistakes but made Jesus alive to me in a way He’d never been before.  Jesus, the One who bore my shame and who cleanses me from all sin.  The One who enables me to stand before the Father unashamed, certain that I am accepted.

When my eyes were opened to His Presence, I was able to look back over the dark, lonely, and frightening bits of my past and see that He was always with me.  I was not ever alone, He hadn’t abandoned me in that moment when certainly I deserved for Him to have done, and I’ve lived every moment of every day since then aware of Him.  He will not ever leave me.  He cannot for He is not separate from me.

So, who is the Holy Spirit?  I’ve addressed the word another before but, again: Jesus said he would send “another comforter” and the word another here means, another of the same sort.  (See Allos G243 in Strong’s Concordance and “Another” in Vine’s Expository Dictionary).  Another: different and yet the same.  In Ezekiel 36:27, God says “I will put My Spirit within you” so the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God and, indeed, I see as much in Acts 13:2 where the Holy Spirit speaks as God. 

How do we believers explain the nature of God?  He is Triune, we say: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.  Three and yet One.  Impossible, I have heard some say, and the term “Trinity” isn’t in the Bible.  No, I agree that it isn’t but I don’t know of a better word unless I use “Perichoresis”.  It’s a beautiful word used to describe the relationship Father, Son, and Holy Spirit share with each other.  I have another word I like to use when I think of the nature of God: paradox.  He is (in my opinion) the ultimate paradox.  He is Three distinct Persons but exists in such perfect love relationship union that it’s impossible for Him to be separate. My spirit, in union with His Spirit cries in joy, “The Lord Our God, The Lord is One!” (Deuteronomy 6:4, Mark 12:29).

I know this post is a bit long but I want to make clear what I believe and where I stand as I begin to study the Fruit of the Spirit.  I hope I have done so.  If not, I hope it becomes clear as I begin, next week, looking at the first fruit: love.

To be continued…

Identity

08 Monday Mar 2021

Posted by in Poetry, Writing

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

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

I was thinking how often I say “I Am” and then say something negative about myself. By doing so, I am creating my own existence for “As a man (woman in this case) thinks in his (her) heart, so is he (she).” Proverbs 23:7. I am changing that habit and striving to say what My Heavenly Father says about me whenever the words “I Am” come out of my mouth. While trying to put my thoughts in order, I wrote the following poem:

Identity

A thousand voices call to me

Demanding that I hear

The words they speak into me

And I cannot but draw near-

I hear them clearly now I’m close

And their words make my heart sink

“We alone know what is true:

We will tell you what to think.”

A thousand voices seek for me

They call me left and right

Demanding I align with them

With what they say is right

I cannot escape from them

Though I’ve run so very far-

“You cannot know yourself,” they say

“We will show you who you are.”

One Voice cuts through all the noise

The pressures, the demands

Bringing silence, bringing peace

Assuring me He understands

The burdens I have carried

As I’ve struggled to define

Just who I am in this world-

His Voice says “You are mine.”

“I Am,” He says, “All that I Am,

I Am Always Ever Now

All that I Am is for you

Let me show you how

My life is lived inside of yours

I in you and you in Me

You dwell inside my light

I Am your identity.”

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

Birth or Baptism

04 Monday Jan 2021

Posted by in Gospel and Letters of John, Studies

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

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

What have I been saying over the last seven weeks?  Am I saying that since I don’t believe John 3:5 is speaking of water baptism that I don’t think water baptism is important?  Not at all.  As I read through the Book of Acts, I find that water baptism was a vital part of the life of a Christian.  I wholeheartedly agree with Dr. Vincent that baptism “is a truthful sign only as the sign of an inward and spiritual grace.”1 The reason for this study was my quibble with the statement made on social media that water baptism was a law laid down by Jesus.  A church in my area came across my Facebook feed and, when I checked out their statement of faith, I saw that they said practically the same thing.  The statement of faith used “ordinance” rather than law but that’s merely a fancier way of saying the same thing. 

What’s the big deal?  If people are getting saved and baptized anyway, what does it matter if water baptism and born of water are or are not the same thing? It matters to me.  It matters because I am concerned when leaders start using the word “law” when it comes to the life of Jesus in us.  I am also concerned when the keeping of the law of being baptized in water is put forward as the interpretation of John 3:5 when Jesus goes on to say, “no man can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.”  This is serious.  Jesus was serious when he said it.  The true meaning of His words is vital.

That being born of water has to mean something other than water baptism, something that must take place on the inside of a person, is made clear by Luke 17 verses 20 and 21: “Once, on being asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, ‘The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say ‘Here it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.’” The King James Version has it “the kingdom of God is within you.”  If it is within, then John 3:5 has to be talking about an inward change-the new heart and new spirit God promises in Ezekiel 36-because, on its own, water baptism has no ability to birth anyone into anything other than a denomination. 

I follow a Facebook page called A.W. Tozer-A man of God and this page recently shared an excerpt from his sermon “Spiritual Readiness”.  It struck me when I read “The evangelical church has come through a period when nearly everyone has believed that there is just one prerequisite to readiness: being born again.  We have made being born again almost like receiving a pass to a special event-when Jesus returns we whip out the pass to prove our readiness.”  I feel this way about keeping laws: no one will ever convince me that ticking my Christian box next to water baptism in any way prepares me to “let this same mind be in me that was in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:5, paraphrased), or “to be molded into the image of His Son (and share inwardly of His likeness)” (Romans 8:29).

But then, what about Mark 16: 16; “He who believes and is baptized will be saved: but he who does not believe will be condemned”?  Is this passage talking of water baptism?  Romans 5:9 says “Therefore, since we are now justified (acquitted, made righteous, and brought into right relationship with God) by Christ’s blood, how much more (certain is it that) we shall be saved by Him from the indignation and wrath of God?” Ephesians 1:7 says “In Him we have redemption (deliverance and salvation) through His blood, the remission (forgiveness) of our offenses (shortcomings and trespasses) in accordance with the riches and the generosity of His gracious favor”.  No mention of water baptism.  Perhaps Jesus meant water baptism after believing in Him but, again, there is something that must happen inside us before the water baptism means anything.

John the baptizer said Jesus was the one who would baptize with “the Holy Spirit and with fire” (Matthew 2:11).  I want to share two scriptures about fire.  Jeremiah 23:29 says “Isn’t my word like fire, asks Adonai, like a hammer shattering rocks?” The writer to the Hebrews states “our God is a consuming fire!” (Hebrews 12:29)  Perhaps I’m pushing the point too hard but, in doing this study, I am convinced that being born of water and the spirit does mean being born of the Word and the Spirit. Jesus is the Word (John 1:1) and “The Word of the Lord endures forever.  And this Word is the good news which was preached to you.” (1 Peter 1:25)  There are so many more beautiful scriptures, some of which I’ve quoted in the previous installments of this study, so I close with this thought.

Maybe I have misunderstood and these leaders don’t really mean law law.  Perhaps all they mean is that baptism is important and I’ve said I don’t disagree.  Here’s my problem: a simple Google search shows people are reaching out and asking whether or not they are saved if they’ve never been baptized.  Is the sprinkling practiced by some denominations enough or do they have to be full on immersed?  What about the baptizing of infants?  I also recently heard that certain denominations recognize the baptism of certain other denominations but not all.  So, in order to be sure I’m saved, I have to be sure I’ve been baptized by the correct denomination?  This sounds like the “doctrines of baptism” spoken about by the writer to the Hebrews (Chapter 6 verse 2).

I wanted to do this study because, when I am looking online, I rarely see anyone pointing out that an inward change is what’s is of paramount importance.  What’s even more distressing to me, is that I rarely see anyone talking about the Holy Spirit.  He’s treated like He’s the icing on the Christian life-nice but not really necessary-or reserved for a certain few who have a deeper life or deeper conversion.

No.  “But you are not living the life of the flesh, you are living the life of the Spirit, if the Holy Spirit of God (really) dwells within you (directs and controls you).  But if anyone does not possess the (Holy) Spirit of Christ, he is none of His (he does not belong to Christ is not truly a child of God).”  This is Romans 8:9 and I would encourage you to read all of Chapter 8.  I’ll quote verses 14 and 15: For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.  For (the Spirit which) you have now received (is) not a spirit of slavery to put you once more in bondage to fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption (the Spirit producing sonship) in (the bliss of) which we cry, Abba! Father!  

If you have been baptized, wonderful.  If you have not, I hope you have the peace to know it doesn’t affect your salvation.  My prayer is that our eyes are opened to see “by (means of the personal agency of) one (Holy) Spirit we were all, whether Jews or Greeks, slaves or free, baptized (and by baptism united together) into one body and all made to drink of one (Holy) Spirit.”  Christ in us, His life in us testified to us by His Spirit, is the water and Spirit that births us into His kingdom. 

Even so, Come Lord Jesus.

  1. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D., Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, Gospel of John, 5. Born of Water and the Spirit, Page 92.

Back to Part Seven

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 Grammar of Complexity

30 Monday Nov 2020

Posted by in Gospel and Letters of John, Studies

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

In last week’s post I one, mentioned my study of John 3:5 was pointing me to Ezekiel chapter 36: 25-27 and two, I quoted the commentary for John 3:5 from The Jewish Study Bible.  I am currently doing a word study on Ezekiel 36.  I am taking notes and also noting ideas I hope to share in later posts.  For this week, I wish to address hendiadys. 

The last sentence of The Jewish Study Bible’s commentary on John 3:5 says “…the grammatical construction (hendiadys) indicates that “water“ is a descriptor of the Spirit, as in Ezekiel 36:25-27”1.  I had to look up hendiadys.  I shared a link to the definition in last week’s post but am including it here from dictionary.com:  hendiadys =  a figure in which a complex idea is expressed by two words connected by a copulative conjunction: “to look with eyes and envy” instead of “with envious eyes.”  That must mean then that being born of water and the spirit are one and the same thing and no inference to baptism can be made.   

And yet the commentary by Dr. Vincent states that “We are not to understand with Calvin, the Holy Spirit as the purifying water in the spiritual sense: ‘water which is the spirit’”2.  Dr. Vincent then goes on to make his case for water baptism, portions of which I’ve quoted before.  I cannot speak with any authority on the beliefs of Calvin.  I’ve got books on religion on my shelves which I’ve had time to do little more than peruse and thus know little more than the broad strokes of Calvin’s beliefs.  And so–for the sake of argument and this post, I set all these authorities aside and am supposing that being born of water does NOT mean water baptism and instead seek to know if the grammatical structure IS saying that born of water and the spirit expresses a single complex idea. 

Bear with me…

The commentary on John 3:5 in The Passion Translation says that the water in John 3:6 is “the water of the Word of God that cleanses and gives us life” and directs me to Ephesians 5: 25 and 26, James 1:18, and 1 Peter 1:23.  Ephesians 5:26 does indeed say “that He might sanctify and cleanse her (the Church) with the washing of water by the word.  James 1:18 says “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”. 

J. Preston Eby quotes 1 Peter 1:23 in his teaching on John 3:5:  “Scripture abounds in figures, and Jesus always spoke in symbolic terms.  When He said, “Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, ye have no life in you,” He certainly was not advocating cannibalism!  He was using a natural figure to illustrate a spiritual truth.  So when He says one must be “born of water” do not understand water to mean what we are accustomed to think of as the natural water that men drink or wash in.  It is a figure of THE LIVING WORD OF GOD.  New birth ever, and only, is by the Word of God and by the Spirit of God.  These are the only two agents directly involved in the new birth throughout the scriptures.  “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever” (I Pet. 1:23).  Some have thought the water to mean baptism.  But there is no mention of baptism in chapter three of John, nor is baptism ever connected anywhere in the New Testament with the new birth. A man can no more be born again by coming up out of natural water than he can be born again by entering the second time into his mother’s womb.  Both are physical, natural, earthly, temporal and corruptible things.  They are not agents of the spiritual world at all.” The Kingdom of God-Part 6

In the first post of this series, I listed scriptures used for reference by Dr. Vincent; namely Psalms 51:2&7, Ezekiel 36:25, and Zechariah 13:14.  Zechariah 13:1 says, “In that day a fountain shall be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for uncleanness.”  When I quoted this in the first post, I remembered the story of the woman at the well told in the 4th chapter of John’s Gospel where Jesus said to her, “If you had only known and had recognized God’s gift and Who this is saying to you, Give Me a drink, you would have asked Him [instead] and He would have given you living water”. Jesus says in verse 14: “But the water that I will give him shall become a spring of water welling up (flowing, bubbling) [continually] within him unto (into, for) eternal life” and then in Chapter 7 verses 38 and 39: “’He who believes in Me [who cleaves to and trusts in and relies on Me] as the Scripture has said, From his innermost being shall flow [continuously] springs and rivers of living water’. But He was speaking here of the Spirit…” (Amplified)

Does being born of water mean being born of the living word of God? If so, are they separate but equal agents? Does born of water mean the living water that Jesus gives which is the spirit? Am I failing to grasp a concept which is, really, quite simple?

My confusion clears when I consider John 14:16 which says: “And I will ask the Father and He will give you another Comforter…”  The Greek word for another is this passage is allos (G243). Vine’s Expository Dictionary says there are two words for “another” in the Greek: allos and heteros.  “ALLOS and HETEROS have a difference in meaning, which despite a tendency to be lost, is to be observed in numerous passages.  Allos expresses a numerical difference and denotes another of the same sort: heteros expresses a qualitative difference and denotes another of a different sort.  Christ promised to send “another Comforter” (allos, another like Himself…)”5

Perhaps the grammatical structure of John 3:5 is expressing something that can that only be understood by the Spirit and that is the very being of God. Father, Son, Spirit: They are Three and They are One. Hendiadys.

To be continued… 

Some extra study links:

Living Water

  1. The Complete Jewish Study Bible, 2016, Peabody Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers Marketing LLC, Gospel of John, Commentary, 3:5, Page 1524
  2. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D., Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, Gospel of John, 5. Born of Water and the Spirit, Page 91
  3. https://www.godfire.net/eby/Kingdom6.html   
  4. 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
  5. Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, 1997, Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson, Inc., Another, Page 52

Back to Part Two

Continue to Part Four

The Mind of a Man

23 Monday Nov 2020

Posted by in Gospel and Letters of John, Studies

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

A fun photo I thought reminiscent of meeting at night

This week’s post continues my looking at John 3:5.  I have asked myself if “born of water” in this verse really does mean water baptism.  I spent some time on the internet since last week’s post and have seen the same number of blog posts insisting it does mean water baptism as there are posts that insist it does not.  This week, I return to the reference materials I have at hand in attempts to answer the question to my own satisfaction.  As always, I thank the Holy Spirit for being my guide and teacher and opening my eyes to what He would have me see.  Then, I open Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament and begin to read.

I must begin by saying the commentary for Born of Water and the Spirit is beautiful.  Dr. Vincent says wonderful things about baptism which I may end up sharing in future posts.  I must also say that I don’t disagree with anything he says about baptism, especially; “baptism considered merely as a rite, and apart from the operation of the Spirit does not and cannot impart new life.1”  Despite this, I still have a quibble with the assumption that water baptism is what Nicodemus should have realized. 

In order to look at John 3:5, I have to back up to John 3:3 where Jesus says “…unless a person is born again…”  Dr. Vincent expounds on the meaning of the word “again” listing its usages and translations in the New Testament.  Again is translated “From the Top” (Matthew 27:51, Mark 15:38, John 19:23), “From above” (John 3:31 & 19:11, James 1:17 & 3:15, 17) “From the Beginning” (Luke 1:3, Acts 26:5), and “again” (Galatians 4:9)2.  Dr. Vincent concludes his exposition of this verse by stating the closest rendering of this phrase is “except a man be born anew”; a rendering which would explain Nicodemus’ confusion. 

I do find there is agreement on one thing: that Jesus’ words in verse 5 are His explaining what He meant in verse 3.  Being “born of water and the spirit” is synonymous with being “born again or anew.”  Dr. Vincent says, “Thus Jesus’ words included a prophetic reference to the complete ideal of Christian baptism–‘the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Ghost’ (Titus 3: 5; Ephesians 5:26)3. 

Before I go any further, I must ask consider Nicodemus himself.  Was he someone genuinely seeking answers from Jesus-the “anxious inquirer”-or did he come to Jesus as a member of the Pharisees as a class who, anxious to keep their leadership in religion, desired to discover whether they could come to an understanding with this new teacher?4  I am not ready to declare myself certain one way or another.  What I do say with certainty is Jesus expected Nicodemus to understand what he was saying and I find these arguments for water baptism rely heavily on the New Testament.  It may be too easy for us, partakers of the New Covenant, looking at scripture from the finished work of Christ, to infer meanings that simply would not have been in the mind of a 1st century Pharisee.  To suggest that Jesus was speaking prophetically of the ideal of Christian baptism and then to chastise Nicodemus for not understanding when Jesus was not only at the beginning of His ministry but no one knew for certain what was happening; does make Jesus appear a bit unreasonable.  Even writing that last sentence I know I too am referencing the New Testament-2 Corinthians 2:8 in fact-and so I resolve to forget the New Testament for a moment.

Nicodemus would have had the scriptures called the Old Testament in my bibles.  As a teacher of Israel (John 3:10), Nicodemus would have been familiar with them in a way I can only imagine.  Is it possible, then, for me to get inside the mind of this man?  Not without help certainly and, for that, I turn to The Complete Jewish Study Bible.

When I look up my study text, I find an article entitled ‘“Born Again” John 3:3’.  This article tells me what the concept of being born again might have meant to Nicodemus.  The article states Nicodemus had reached the age of a senior citizen and had already met the Pharisee requirements of being “born again”, that there were six ways of being “born again” in Pharisaic Judaism, that Nicodemus was already qualified in four of those ways, and that the other two would have been impossible for him.  The two this article says were impossible for him were 1, a Gentile was said to be “born again” if he converted to Judaism and 2, Nicodemus would have to have been crowned as king. 

The four requirements Nicodemus already fulfilled were:

  1. When a Jewish boy becomes bar mitzvah at thirteen, he is said to be “born again”.  Nicodemus was well beyond the age of thirteen, had already experienced his bar mitzvah and was thus already “born again”. 
  2. Marriage.  When a Jewish man married he was said to be “born again.”  A member of the Sanhedrin must be married so Nicodemus already fulfilled this requirement since he was already a member of the Sanhedrin. 
  3. A Jew could be “born again” when ordained as a rabbi.  Jesus calls Nicodemus rabbi/teacher (verse 10). 
  4. The head of a rabbinical school was said to be “born again”.  Jesus said Nicodemus “held the office of teacher in Israel” (verse 10) which meant he was already head of a school.5

I found this article fascinating but perhaps it doesn’t really move me toward answering my material question of equating water baptism with being born of water.  The Complete Jewish Study Bible has some commentary on verse 5: “Born from water and the Spirit”.  In Judaism, immersion in water is directly linked to ritual cleansing of the body, while the Spirit enables people to turn from sin and live a holy life.  “Born from water” in its grammatical construction refers to the Holy Spirit (Ezekial 36:25-27; John 7:38-39).  There is no necessary reference to the mikveh (ritual cleansing bath) here.  Rather, the grammatical construction (hendiadys) indicates that “water” is a descriptor of the Spirit, as in Ezekiel 36:25-27.6

This is not the first time I’ve been pointed to Ezekiel 36:25-27 from both sides of the argument.  I have learned to pay attention when the same verse or concept keeps popping up and, thus, 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, 5. Born of Water and the Spirit, Page 92.
  2. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D., Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, Gospel of John, 3. Be born again, Page 90.
  3. Vincent, Marvin R., D.D., Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament Volume II, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers, Gospel of John, 5. Born of Water and the Spirit, Page 92.
  4. Eiselen, Lewis, Downey, The Abingdon Bible Commentary, 1929, The Abingdon Press, Inc., John Chapter II, the Interview with Nicodemus, Page 1069.
  5. The Complete Jewish Study Bible, 2016, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, LLC, Gospel of John, Supplementary Article “Born Again” John 3:3, Page 1525.
  6. The Complete Jewish Study Bible, 2016, Peabody, Massachusetts, Hendrickson Publishers Marketing, LLC, Gospel of John, Commentary, 3:5, Page 1524

Back to Part One

Continue to Part Three