"Stones or Faith?" - the interpreters' version

This is a revision of "Stones or Faith?", specially for preaching across the language barrier, i.e., through live interpretation. You'll notice that the phrasing is quite different from the "original" version-- which wasn't actually original, since it was my translation into English of my Russian original, but anyway, neither the "original" Russian or English versions were designed to be preached "in stereo", i.e., me, then interpreter, then me, then interpreter, etc.  This version reduces the thoughts to bite-size chunks, to make for a relaxed, smooth exchange between me and the interpreter. The key is "concise, full thoughts". The two things an interpreter can't stand are, 1) run-on sentences, and 2) fragments of a thought. Those who are speaking to an audience through an interpreter for the first time often make both mistakes - the first, because they get carried away with their thoughts and forget the poor interpreter has to remember everything and translate it for the audience; the second, because the speaker gets over-cautious (indeed, sometimes virtually paranoid) and, trying not to overload the interpreter, offers a "sentence" like, "Because of which, we'll most likely"-- then gives the interpreter an okay-you-can-translate-that look, to which the exasperated interpreter replies with a you-haven't-actually-SAID-anything-yet look.  

So, here it is: 

Stones or Faith? 

Read John 10:24-31

In verse 23 the people press Jesus to speak openly, "When will you tell us who you are?", and Jesus responds, "I have told you".

When did Jesus tell them? Well, look at verse 7 in this chapter: "I am the door". And verse 9: "Whoever enters through me will be saved". And verse 10: I have come that they might have life". Also verse 11: "I am the good shepherd". And one more, verse 15: "The Father knows me and I know the Father".

Has Jesus really been hiding the meaning of his mission? Not at all! He is openly announcing the meaning and purpose of his coming. Nevertheless, the people continue asking, "Who are you?" Jesus answers, "I have told you, but you do not believe". And that really is what this is all about. If the people are unwilling to believe, then no matter what Jesus says, their next question will be, "Who are you?" Because they don't believe, they don't hear. So words become useless. Even miracles hardly help. Jesus says (read vv. 25b-26a), "The works that I do in my Father's name testify of me, but you don't believe". So neither words nor miracles make any difference. Why? The Lord explains why: (26b) "You don't believe because you are not of my sheep, as I have told you."

"Not of my sheep"—there is the crux of this issue. Again and again, Jesus has talked about this special relationship, a relationship in which the sheep know the shepherd; they know his voice. As in verse 3 (read), and verse 4 (read), likewise verse 14 (read), and verse 16 (read). To those who "have ears to hear", Jesus makes it quite very clear what he means. Standing here in front of the people is not only a teacher, not only a prophet, and (listen very carefully now), not only Christ as the people expected Christ! Instead, standing here in front of them is Christ as he really is. It turns out that the real Messiah cannot be defined according to human understanding. The critical element is not whether Christ meets our expectations; the critical element is whether we will hear what he's saying. Do his words reveal truth and life to our hearts?

Jesus cannot tell the crowd, "Yes, I am everything you've been waiting for", because they haven't been waiting for Messiah as he really is. In fact, the Lord did them a kindness by not telling them such a thing, for they would surely have misunderstood. Actually, it was only on the rarest occasions that Jesus spoke so plainly, that he told a person directly, "I am the Christ". When did he do this? It wasn't when the people and their leaders were demanding an answer from him, especially when they were doing so aggressively. No, it was when a person's faith was just being born and needed assurance.

We see such an instance in chapter 9. Let's read 9:35-38. This man had been blind all his life and Jesus gave him sight. Imagine that! And this man refused to denounce Jesus for the healing, even when the Pharisees threatened to throw him out of the temple forever. What a day in this man's life! He received sight which he had never had in his whole life. And he was excommunicated from the most sacred place in his religion. All on the same day! Imagine the emotional earthquake this was for him. And in the middle of this earthquake, Jesus walks up to him and asks, "Do you believe in the Son of man?" The poor man answers in desperation, "Who is he, Lord, so I can believe in him?" And Jesus gives this man the answer he wouldn't give to society's bigshots when they demanded it. He says, "You've seen him; you're talking to him."

Christ spoke similarly to a woman at a well one day in Samaria, to a woman who was disgraced for her sin and shunned by society. When she was just beginning to see, she let the half-hoping words slip out: "They say that… when Messiah comes… he'll tell us everything…." Jesus looks her straight in the eye and says, "The one talking with you now is he."

The key element in these cases was this: the person's heart was starting to open to the deeper reality of Jesus' identity. The person wasn't ordering Jesus to conform to some list of requirements. Jesus offers the gift of life to those how receive him just as he is. He shows his true glory to the ones who accept him in faith. When people accept Christ just as he is, then he accepts them just as they are.

But why didn't the Pharisees and crowds understand? It was because they didn't believe. But why didn't they believe? (read 10:26-27) What makes a person not Christ's sheep? It's the absence of any desire to meet God, of any desire to know and love the Creator. It's the attachment to self that won't admit any possibility of God's changing you.

The sheep belongs to the shepherd; it is his and it totally trusts him. But the bystander, the stranger, doesn't belong to him, and doesn't want to! Do we desire encounter with God? Are we ready to trust Him? If so, God will reveal truth to our hearts. Jesus said to the people, in John 7:17: "Whoever is willing to do [God's] will, that one will know whether my teaching is from God or whether I'm just speaking for myself." If a person has the desire and is ready to receive, then the Lord will find him.

While we're in chapter 7, look at the next verse, verse 18. This verse made me meditate further on these things (read).

Jesus says about himself that he doesn’t seek his own; instead, he seeks the glory of the one who sent him. We can make a parallel here to Jesus' followers: the good shepherd's sheep also don't seek their own; they seek what will glorify God. In this way they're like the good shepherd—maybe not perfectly, but they have his calling in their hearts. Christ desires above all the Father's glory. So, this is what Christ's sheep desire, too. They hear him and grow like him; they follow him and he knows them. And he can say anything to them and they'll receive it. Christ can even say something like this to them (read 10:28-30).

Here is Christ just as he is. Who can receive such words? Who can receive a Messiah who says such things--who says such things as "I and the Father are one"? The people demanded, "Tell us plainly!" So Jesus told them plainly: "I and the Father are one." It was obvious from the beginning, wasn't it, that it would all come to this. Who could have the right to say something like, "I am the door; whoever enters through me will be saved"? Or, "I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me"? Or, "I have the power to lay down my life and take it up again"? Who can say such things? Only the one who can say, "I and the Father are one". This is he who promises eternal life—and really fulfills the promise! He holds believers in his hand, which is the hand of God, and he guards them from the enemy. Jesus didn't come to the world in order to obey people's definition of "Christ". He came to define the word himself! To define by his own being what and who God's Christ is. Through his words and works, through his love and sacrifice, through his power and authority, Jesus did define "Christ", and "Christ" is everything that Jesus is.

When Jesus Christ made it very clear who he was, what did the people do in response? Did they say, "Thank you very much"? No. (read 10:31-33)

There's the difference between the ones who are Christ's sheep and those who aren't. We see here the response of those who aren't his. The true sheep hear and receive, they contemplate and submit to his word. They look at the one who is saying these words and think: "If such a person as this says such words, a person who does such miracles, a person who radiates such truth and grace—if such a person says such words, then they are true words. Our true Shepherd and God has visited His people."

But those who only wanted to judge Jesus, not to know him, they of course picked up stones. Stones or faith—these are the two responses to the Good Shepherd's revelation. Stones or faith. Anger or love. Rejection or embrace. The response we make will show whether we belong to him. He gave his life for his sheep. He gave his life and he took it up again, not because the people expected it, but because that's who he is! "Tell us who you are!", the people shouted. But just look at Jesus, listen to him, with a sincere heart towards God, and you'll know who he is. More importantly, he'll know you.

Crisis in the Early Church, Part Three: Hebrews

This is the last of three sermons which I wanted to give concerning a key crisis in the earliest days of the Church of Jesus Christ. Let's quickly review what we examined in the first two sermons.

In Paul's epistle to the Galatians, the apostle practically begs the Galatian believers not to leave the true gospel and pure teaching about Christ which he brought them. Notice and pay strong attention, because this element of the crisis happens to come to a climax in today's sermon, to wit: "will they leave the true gospel of Christ?"

Will who leave? Well, that's what we'll see today.

But first, to review the first two sermons….

Paul wrote to the Galatians to contradict and refute a distorted gospel brought by a certain faction from Jerusalem. We called them the "Jerusalem missionaries", as you may recall. And you remember that their so-called gospel declared: "Messiah came to lead us all to perfect observance of God's holy law. He opened the door to us all to come in to the holy nation Israel. Therefore, to be saved, fully become children of Abraham through circumcision and obedience to the whole law of Moses."

You remember that I encapsulated the difference between their gospel and Paul's gospel this way: according to their gospel, at the end of the road of redemption stands the Law, as "goal". But in Paul's gospel, at the end of that road stands Jesus Christ, with open arms, to receive the children of God—whom he himself has made such. As Paul said to the Romans, the end of the law is Christ, for all who believe. And the word Paul uses there, that we translate "end", means both "end" and "goal" or "aim". For Paul, Christ himself is the Law's "ultimate destination". But for those Jerusalem missionaries it's vice versa: the goal of Christ is the Law!

There cannot be a starker contrast.

I won't repeat all of Paul's argumentation in Galatians; otherwise I'd have to repeat the whole first sermon! I want simply to emphasize this one, central, key, essential, indispensable (!) argument Paul makes to them. Basically, he says, "Dear Galatians, did God give you His Spirit or not? Did He or didn't He? If He did, then you are His children and… those people cannot add anything good to the word of life you already received by faith." That's all of Paul's argument in a nutshell, along with the logical corollary that goes, "So if you live by the life of the Spirit in you, then no law will be able either to increase your holiness before God or  judge you." Let me repeat that: if you walk in the Spirit, then there's no law that can, 1) make you "better", or, 2) prove you’re "bad".

That's an interesting thought, isn't it? What's the use, ultimately, of a law incapable of both justifying and condemning? Christ is the end of the law. For whom? For all who believe.

"Now there is no condemnation, to those who are in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 8:1)—so, the law cannot condemn.

 "Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Rom. 5:11)—so, the law cannot justify.

Can't condemn, can't justify- for whom? For those who believe. For them, there's no role left for the Law, now.

Well, I'm already quoting Romans so much, I suppose we'd better review, in brief, what I said in the second sermon.

I suggested the possibility to you that the continuing crisis in the early Church prompted Paul to write also to the Romans. There is persuasive evidence in this epistle that Paul continues to challenge both the false gospel of this faction from Jerusalem and their false charges against him personally.

In Romans, Paul proves that, 1) he does not profane God's holy law, 2) he does not hate the Jewish nation, and, 3) he does not preach an immoral, unholy way of life. It's clear from his arguments what kind of rumors were circulating about him, and it's clear why: in order to discredit Paul and his gospel. It's also clear, historically, that the Jerusalem missionaries and their message couldn't, finally, prevail over the gospel of grace, faith and the Spirit. We do not see Paul, in his later and final epistles continuing to wrestle with these heretics in anything like the way he does here. History itself testifies that this movement could not finally survive within the Christian Church.

And that, it just so happens, brings us to the epistle to the Hebrews. Let's read Hebrews 1:1-2....

¹ In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, ² but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

First, who is the writer speaking about? About Jesus Christ—yes.

Secondly, he's writing about how God has spoken:

…in the past: "at many times and in various ways";

…"in these last days: by his Son".

Thirdly, to whom is the writer speaking? Notice: "God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets…." He is writing to the descendants of those "forefathers"; he is writing to the children of Israel. These three nuances are critical: who the writer is writing about, how God has decided to act, and to whom the writer is addressing his arguments.

So from the very beginning, three key elements of the epistle become clear: 
a) the center of attention is Jesus Christ, who he is;

b) the deciding factor  in everything is what God chooses to do;

 c) the first "audience" for this epistle is Jews, Hebrews who at some point came to faith in Jesus as the Christ.  


These three things decide the whole sense and purpose of Hebrews.

We don't know who wrote this epistle, and many commentators and scholars say it can't be Paul because the epistle itself doesn’t sound like Paul. The style, the general approach and method of argumentation don’t  sound anything like what Paul writes, for instance, to the Corinthians or Ephesians, etc.

Well, that may be. I readily admit that the epistle doesn't sound like Paul's epistles. But I have to say two things: first of all, the theological horizon, or "eschatological construct", if you will, of this writer is identical to that of the apostle Paul; secondly, if Paul chose to undertake the composition of a profoundly argued theological letter specifically and precisely to the people of his own nation, then I, for one, would expect nothing other than "The Epistle to the Hebrews" we have in our Bibles today. It's exactly the language I'd expect him to adopt and exactly the argument I'd expect him to make, and, indeed, if you read his other epistles with careful "theological" attention, you will find that he is, rather often, arguing like our "Hebrews writer"!

I am not prepared to underestimate the capacities of the apostle who said, "For the Greeks I became a Greek, for the Jews I became a Jew". The writer of this epistle has clearly "gone for broke"; he has written nothing less than what had to be written in order to speak to Hebrew Christians (on the verge of apostasy) in language they would get, at the deepest, felt levels. The writer does everything short of writing in Hebrew! (Who knows, maybe he did that, too, in a separate copy.) By the way, he writes so passionately, shows such agonized concern over the possibility that his readers will abandon Jesus, that I cannot help being reminded of Paul's words in Romans 9:1-2: ¹ I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it through the Holy Spirit—² I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart.

Therefore, my personal position is this: first, even if Paul wasn't the writer of Hebrews, someone closely associated with him and his way of thinking, someone who drank at the springs of Paul's teaching, was. Second, I'm convinced that, in this epistle, it just so happens we're confronting the climax of that crisis in the early church in which Paul played such a key role, the crisis Paul himself did address in Galatians and Romans. So for these two reasons, I consider Hebrews to be Paul's ultimate answer— at least the ultimate "Pauline" answer—to those Hebrew-Christians who dared attempt to obscure the Person of Christ by means of The Law.

Which brings us back to the beginning of the epistle, in which, I'm convinced, we come face to face with the very essence of what this whole crisis was all about right from the beginning. Those who placed the Law higher than Christ are the very ones who, when all was said and done, simply couldn't bring themselves to submit to the deity  of the eternal Son of God, the Lord  Jesus Christ. That's why the writer of Hebrews asserts at the very start the supremacy and transcendence of the very Person of the Son.

(Heb. 1:3-4) ³ The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. ⁴ So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.

 If the Hebrews to whom this was written had only embraced this one single truth (as they should have) the crisis would never have happened, and there'd have been no need for this epistle. 
"...As much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs." "I am the way, the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me"…. This is both who Jesus is, and what God has done.

I said that, here at the beginning of the epistle, the writer specifically, intentionally, compares how God spoke to the nation in the past, i.e., through the prophets, and how He has spoken "to us" in these recent days, i.e., through His Son.  The former was God's act, and the latter was God's act. We are talking about God's choice here, the prerogative and acts of the Almighty. It's God who has spoken to us through His Son, God who has made him heir of all things, God who created all worlds and ages through Him. If God has chosen to act through His Son this way, then who among human beings, who in the whole universe, will tell Him that He can't? If this is really God's act, right here on earth among us, manifested and accomplished for the world's redemption, who has the right to opt for a different scenario? 


"No-o-o, thanks, but I like the old way better; I'd prefer to stick with the Law. Thanks, really, but how 'bout you go on believing in Jesus if you want while I just listen to Moses and the prophets, okay?"

And who, precisely, has God offered that choice to? Nobody! In Moses' time, too, there were those in the nation who said, "No, thanks, we'll stay here in Egypt. Sure, it's hard sometimes, but we're used to it." Moses had to convince them that the Lord God "I AM" wasn't offering them a range of options; He was revealing the Way. And God's Way knows only one direction: forward.

Clearly, this epistle is written to those who thought they had "options" to choose from. They had tried the "Jesus option" and been disappointed. Why? I strongly suspect that among the Hebrew-Christians addressed by this epistle, there were those had been horribly offended when their so-called gospel was overwhelmingly rejected by the churches and their missionary work came to nothing. They believed in the supremacy of the Law so much that, when it became obvious there was no place in the Congregation of Messiah Yeshua—that is, the Church of Jesus Christ—for their "gospel", they opted to reject Jesus altogether, and they pressured the other Hebrew-Christians to do the same.

I can imagine their argument…. "Well, brother, take a look around you and see what's happening. You and I are nobodies now in this little 'society'. The Gentiles don't honor us or our Law, and dare to call themselves children of Abraham! And our brothers in the flesh, the people of our nation, spurn us because we confess the name of Jesus. Where in the world have we wound up, brother? Come on, let's go back, let's go home, to the prophets, the temple, the holy city, the Law. Our people will forgive us and take us back, and we'll start serving God the way we used to again. As for this so-called gospel of Jesus, well, it obviously hasn't worked out. We were wrong."

And to precisely those who are thinking like that, this epistle is written, to those who were on the verge of the most terrible decision a human being can make.

We don't have time here today to examine the whole epistle in detail. I would suggest that, when you go home, you try and read the whole book of Hebrews in one sitting. Keep fixed in your imagination the people the letter's written to: those who considered it a simple thing  to just change their minds and go back, as if Jesus had never even appeared on the scene. And look at what the writer, this servant and evangelist of Jesus Christ, has to say to them. I think you'll see the sense and power of this epistle in a whole new light.

In a whole new way, you'll appreciate what the writer is talking about when he says (2:1-4)

¹ We must pay the most careful attention, therefore, to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away. ² For since the message spoken through angels was binding, and every violation and disobedience received its just punishment, ³how shall we escape if we ignore so great a salvation? This salvation, which was first announced by the Lord, was confirmed to us by those who heard him. ⁴ God also testified to it by signs, wonders and various miracles, and by gifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

God has acted. It's not up to you whether God has acted right. Your job is to submit. And speaking of submission:

(3:5-6) ⁵ “Moses was faithful as a servant in all God’s house,”bearing witness to what would be spoken by God in the future. ⁶ But Christ is faithful as the Son over God’s house. And we are his house, if indeed we hold firmly to our confidence and the hope in which we glory.

This is the "surpassingness", the transcendence, the supremacy of Christ. How can you go back to Moses, and think you're embracing Moses, when you're rejecting the Master of the house in which Moses serves? You're totally deceiving yourselves! Consider what it means to turn away from Christ….

(3:12-14) ¹² See to it, brothers and sisters, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. ¹³ But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called “Today,” so that none of you may be hardened by sin’s deceitfulness. ¹⁴ We have come to share in Christ, if indeed we hold our original conviction firmly to the very end.

To fall away from Christ is one and the same as falling away from the living God. Think about that, and what it says about Christ.

(4:1) ¹ Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it.

God's way is only forward, never back. There is no going back. Entering the rest that God offers, the fulfillment of His promise, is possible only by embracing what God has done. What He has done, what He has accomplished, is communicated in its full perfection in the Person of Jesus Christ.  

And it is about precisely that "communication" that the writer says the following: 

¹² For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart. (4:12)

I hope that, in light of all we've said so far, in light of the concrete, historical context, you have a better feeling for what the term "word of God"  means here. This is not simply the Bible. Rather, it's precisely what the epistle's first readers were preparing to reject. It's the "word", the "news", the "message" of what God has now done. Again, this "word" is not simply the Bible; it's the very fact itself of the historical manifestation of Jesus Christ and what God did by him. This feat, this revelation, this message, the whole redeeming power of his death and resurrection, all of this is contained in the phrase, "the word of God". This is the same thing Paul talks about in Romans 1:16-17:

¹⁶ For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. ¹⁷ For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”

Precisely this word, this message, this manifested salvation is now the whole criterion by which the whole world is either justified or condemned.

¹⁷ For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. ¹⁸ Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. (John 3:17-18)

¹² Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.  (Acts 4:12)

Yet the first readers of Hebrews thought they could just change their minds and forget about Jesus. That's chilling.

Nevertheless, the writer hopes for better. He tells them:

⁹ Even though we speak like this, dear friends, we are convinced of better things in your case—the things that have to do with salvation. ¹⁰ God is not unjust; he will not forget your work and the love you have shown him as you have helped his people and continue to help them. ¹¹ We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, so that what you hope for may be fully realized. (6:9-11).

And from the seventh to tenth chapters, the writer assiduously demonstrates how the whole sense of the Old Testament revelation is ultimately realized by Christ. Melchizedek, the king of peace, the king of righteousness, whom Abraham, and in him all Israel, worshipped—this is Christ; the High Priest, not in an earthly temple erected by man, but the eternal intercessor in the true tabernacle made by God Himself—this is Christ; the very blood that enters the heavenly Holy of Holies, once and for all, in perfect sacrifice for sins—this is Jesus Christ.

¹⁹ Therefore, brothers and sisters, since we have confidence to enter the Most Holy Place by the blood of Jesus, ²⁰ by a new and living way opened for us through the curtain, that is, his body, ²¹ and since we have a great priest over the house of God,²² let us draw near to God with a sincere heart and with the full assurance that faith brings, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water.²³ Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. (10:19-23)

With love, but also categorically, the writer warns them:

³² Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you endured in a great conflict full of suffering. ³³Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. ³⁴ You suffered along with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. ³⁵ So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.³⁶ You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised.  (10:32-36).

It's not too late yet, but they have to make the right, necessary choice. They have to hold on to the faith that the whole 11^th chapter talks about. And this whole chapter tells us yet again about how God's plan, always, unceasingly, unstoppably, goes forward. There simply is no way back.

¹ Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, ² fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.(12:1-2)

God will never bring us back to what has already passed, not to the temple Solomon built, not to the mountain where Moses met Him. No.

²² But you have come to Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, ²³ to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, ²⁴ to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel. ²⁵ See to it that you do not refuse him who speaks. If they did not escape when they refused him who warned them on earth, how much less will we, if we turn away from him who warns us from heaven? (12:22-25)

And with these words of encouragement, warning, hope and deep love, the writer brings his letter to a close. Those who agonize over becoming "nobodies" in the Church, those whose "gospel of Law" has been rejected, who are offended at not predominating by right of blood and heritage, who feel like they've been cheated out of their proper due, to those the writer says:

¹¹ The high priest carries the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place as a sin offering, but the bodies are burned outside the camp. ¹² And so Jesus also suffered outside the city gate to make the people holy through his own blood. ¹³ Let us, then, go to him outside the camp, bearing the disgrace he bore. ¹⁴ For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come. (13:11-14)


In the final, loving, hopeful words of the epistle, the writer again does what he did at the beginning: he exalts the Person of Christ, God's supreme authority and the consummate covenant of redemption in Jesus' death and resurrection. Which is what the whole crisis was about from the beginning. And it's what the whole crisis of man and his relationship to God is all about today: will I acknowledge who God is and what He has done for me? Who God is-- that's Christ; and what He has done for me-- that's Christ.    

²⁰ Now may the God of peace, who through the blood of the eternal covenant brought back from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shepherd of the sheep, ²¹ equip you with everything good for doing his will, and may he work in us what is pleasing to him, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen. (13:20-21)

Crisis in the Early Church 2: Letter to the Romans

This is the second of three sermons about a deep crisis in the very earliest Church, at the time of the apostles. This crisis prompted Paul, first of all, to write to the Galatian Christians, and we took a look at that in the first sermon. To quickly repeat: Hebrew-Christian missionaries from Jerusalem came with a different “gospel”, according to which Jesus Christ came into the world in order to convert all people to correct observation of the Mosaic Law and thus become true children of Abraham. Clearly, from the book of Acts, this was a very strong and influential faction in the Jerusalem church adhering to this so-called gospel. Paul severely, categorically condemned their “gospel” in the epistle to the Galatians, asserting that these people wanted to enslave people all over again, that the Holy Spirit, given by God to those receiving Christ by faith, constituted the proof of God’s already making us His children, and concluding his heartfelt, even passionate letter with these words (read Galatians 6:14-18).

And now, Paul sees need in writing to the Romans, and if we read between the lines it becomes clear that the crisis continues. Most likely, these false missionaries were spreading slander against Paul and his gospel, trying to convert everybody to their own “gospel”. And on the basis of what we noticed in Galatians, and what we’ll see in Romans, it’s quite simple to guess what these slanders sounded like:

Paul blasphemes against God’s holy law.
Paul hates the nation of Israel.
Paul preaches a dissolute, unlawful way of life.

In this Epistle to the Romans, we will hear Paul’s response.

To start with, why write to the Romans particularly? In chapter 15 we find out that Paul is preparing to visit the Roman church; moreover, he wants them to help him travel on to Spain, to proclaim the gospel there. Also, we find out in chapter 16 that Paul had a lot of friends—even a relative!—in the Roman church. So it’s quite understandable that Paul wants to dispel the rumors and slander, to correct false understandings, to reassure those in doubt, to comfort those close to him and to prepare the ground for a good visit and further collaboration, and overall to defend the true gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is, therefore, a critically important letter for precisely this moment both in the early life of the Church and in the apostolic work of Paul.

So what does he start the letter with?  (read 1:1-6) Just as Paul said to the Galatians, here he again asserts his direct calling from the Lord to preach the true gospel to Gentiles. Two times here he writes the word “called”: he is called by God Himself to apostleship, and “you”, the Romans, are called to belong to Jesus Christ. As for Christ Himself, the apostle here writes something that, typically, we take to be an exposition of the two natures of Christ, but I am convinced that here the apostle is emphasizing something quite different; perhaps my explanation will help you to come to grips with such strange phrases as “through the Spirit of holiness” and “by his resurrection from the dead”. After all, we know perfectly well that Jesus Christ was the Son of God before his resurrection from the dead; moreover, it’s rather difficult for us to understand the relationship between “declared by the Spirit” and his being God’s Son. So this is a quite problematic passage, in that it seems to deal with the topic of Christ’s two natures but its phraseology doesn’t at all correspond to the real biblical teaching about those two natures! But remember the  two things we noticed in the epistle to the Galatians. First, the death and resurrection of Christ changed everything; we no longer belong to the old world. Second, in the Spirit of God we experience a wholly new kind of life; we see, understand, perceive everything differently, on a new plane—indeed, before all else we perceive Christ Himself in the dimension of the Spirit, not the flesh. I’m convinced that here, too, in Romans, Paul is not so much comparing two natures of Christ as much as talking about two “worlds”, two eras, the former and the new, about that world in which Jesus of Nazareth is just, to those who discern by “the flesh”, a descendant of David, and that world in which, to those born of the Spirit, he is the risen Son of God, the Lord of life Whom we know by the Spirit. This is a crucial concept and truth in all of Paul’s teaching and preaching: are you in Christ, in His Spirit, do you belong to him? If so, then no preacher of the Gospel of Law will manage to deceive you, because you already see with new eyes. It’s in this light, and against the background of everything Paul wrote in his earlier letter already mailed off to the Galatians, that we can perhaps feel in a new way the thrust of Paul’s famous words in 1:16-17 (read).

In general, in chapters 1 and 2 Paul exposits the proper view on the matter of law—in the history of the world and particularly the history of redemption. We may sum it up this way: “We are all sinners, whether we have had God’s Law or not; in any case there is a law in our hearts and it has carried out its task by demonstrating that no one can keep it.”

(Read 2:5)

All broken law has ipso facto accomplished its assignment, and there’s nothing more it can do. Good for you, broken law! You’ve done your job! Therefore, as we read in 3:21-22a (read), there is now a “new righteousness”, something new in Christ, apart from law, since providing us this new thing, this righteousness, was never Law’s job to begin with. This is exactly what Paul was trying to drive home to the Galatians.

We might formulate it like this: Any law that would presume to stand at the end of the road of God’s plan of redemption, like a goal or final destination, is a false law. Only Christ stands there, at the end of that road, and waits for us with open arms in eternal love. Yes, there was a Law somewhere along this road—a stage in the journey—and it fulfilled its role.

In chapter 4 Paul raises the matter of Abraham. Why? It’s clear why. Because the controversy was continuing over how a person can really be justified before God. The false missionaries assumed that the best answer was their answer: to completely embrace the Law. But Paul’s answer goes (read 4:13, 16-17).

As for the 5th chapter, I’d title it “To Those Already in the New Life”, because Paul says (read 5:1), and the key word here is “therefore”, which connotes “since”, “inasmuch as”—you might even say “only if”. Only if we have been justified do we have peace with God. Only if you have received this grace and reconciliation with the Lord can you understand why no law can ever add anything to this perfection of redemption. Our real life began with God’s feat of love (read 5:8), and our future consists not in law but in His perfect will (read 5:10) and the whole sense of our present life consists in peace with Him (read 5:11). In the rest of chapter five Paul explains in detail how, when all is said and done, GRACE EXCELLED LAW PRECISELY INASMUCH AS SALVATION HAD TO EXCEL OUR FALLEN CONDITION AND HELPLESSNESS.

Let me repeat that. The sense of Paul’s teaching can be summed up this way: GRACE EXCELLED LAW PRECISELY INASMUCH AS SALVATION HAD TO EXCEL OUR FALLEN CONDITION AND HELPLESSNESS.

In other words, law required everything we could give, and when we gave everything, law wasn't satisfied. But grace required everything God could give, and He gave everything, and grace was satisfied. Grace was fulfilled, and her fulfillment is salvation to us.

In this light, can you feel how that so-called gospel of the Jerusalem missionaries was, in Paul’s eyes, such a horror? It can never possibly reach the depths of God’s love; on the contrary, it conceals them!

Paul’s answer to anybody who’d accuse him of preaching an immoral lifestyle is found in chapter six: (read 6:1, 2, 8). But even so the foundation of such a transformed life is still God’s gift, not law: (read 6:23).

To anybody who’d accuse him of blaspheming God’s law, Paul replies (7:12) and (7:14).

And then in chapter 8, when the apostle is delving even deeper into the matter of our new life, we find the most striking echo of his letter to the Galatians: (read Romans 8:15-16, then Galatians 4:6-7). It’s perfectly clear that Paul is looking, in both places, at the same deep truth, the truth of the very basis of actual life in Christ and connection with Him: we are already His children, by the fullness of His grace (read 8:17).

I think Paul suffered. I think he wrote his epistle in tears, but he also declares in utter confidence (8:18) and moreover (8:26a).

Over and over again, both in Galatians and Romans, Paul returns to this thought: You, believers, have the Holy Spirit—you already have Him. Why does he keep coming back to this thought? Because this is precisely what the false missionaries were trying to refute! This is the key issue in this historical controversy in the early Church: they assert that, unless we become Hebrews in the full sense, we’ll remain outside the blessings of God, but Paul boldly announces (8:39).

After that, three whole chapters are devoted to the matter of the Jewish nation. This is clearly a continuation of the argument with the heretics. Paul demonstrates explicitly why his rejection of the false Gospel of Law is no sort of rejection or hatred of the nation of Israel itself. He says (read 9:3). But what he goes on to say (read 9:6-7) brings back to us vividly what he said in Galatians 6:15-16 (read) which, in turn, illuminates the sense of Romans 11:26 (read)! Yes, indeed, all of genuine Israel, that is, Abraham’s children by faith, will be saved! The lesson for us is, this ancient conflict between the true gospel and the gospel of the Jerusalem missionaries, that is, between the gospel of Christ and the gospel of law, is no conflict between Jews and Christians, or between the Old and New Testaments, and by no means is it a conflict between a stage in God’s plan, which is the Law, and the perfection of that plan, which is Christ Himself. That’s impossible. Rather, that ancient conflict was between the actual Gospel of Christ and an abominable distortion of it, a “Gospel of the Law”.

For us in Christ, no kind of hatred toward a nation of people can ever be justified. All nations, all people, are equally summed up in sin and their need of salvation by God’s grace. That's Paul’s answer to this whole controversy and scandal and crisis in the early Church. And I am sure that not all were satisfied with his answer. They insisted all the same that the Law and Israelite nation occupy a prime position in the Gospel. And when they finally realized that they’d never prevail over the gospel of grace, they took a radical step, a tragic step, but we will talk about this when we look at the Epistle to the Hebrews.

In conclusion, I want to remark that the last chapters of Romans, starting with chapter 12, are very close in spirit to the 5th and 6th chapters of Galatians.  That is, in both epistles, the apostle, in these final sections, summons the believers to show, to manifest in action, the life of the Spirit, to demonstrate the power of this new world in Christ, a world that now exists in us. (read 12:1) Insofar as the Way of Christ remains on the level of theory and ideas, it remains powerless and irrelevant. So the very word “Therefore” at the start of chapter 12 is far more meaningful than simply a grammatical conjunction. It’s a deep theological conjunction, because the whole significance of this “Therefore” grows directly out of all the deep truths Paul has painstakingly unfolded in the first eleven chapters. He’s saying to us, “In light of all this divine grace and new life in the salvation of Christ, how do we live accordingly?”; therefore we must live like this: (read 12:1 again).

And if we do live like that, the way Paul sketches it out in the last chapters of Romans, then we can, humbly yet boldly, respond to our world and to any who accuse us, just as Paul responded to his accusers: (read Galatians 5:6, 22-23 and 6:15-16).

Amen.

Galatians - CRISIS in the Church's first days

Sometimes we conduct a series of sermons on some book of the Bible, like for instance a Gospel or Epistle, and we very slowly work our way through the book. If I remember correctly, we spent a whole year—or two?—studying Romans on Sunday mornings.

I have nothing against such an approach, but I'm also a proponent of variety! And this is one of the reasons why I plan to deliver three sermons on three epistles: Galatians, Romans and Hebrews. But the more substantial reason is that these three epistles, taken together, pass on the story of a certain crisis in the early Church, a crisis I suspect most of us don't know about. But it's important for us to know about it, because knowledge about this historical crisis will definitely help us, in the first place, to better read Holy Scripture with understanding and, consequently, to apply the meaning of these events in our lives.

The basic method of interpretation I apply here can be called "mirror reading". When I look into a mirror, I see what the mirror reflects. Likewise, when I read a letter, I see what situation the letter reflects. For example, if I find a letter on the ground, pick it up, and take a peek to see what it says, maybe I read:

Dear John,

No, no, a thousand times no. I love another. Forget me.

Maria

Although I don't know Maria or John, I already know a lot about them, and about the situation that this letter reflects. It tells me that, probably, John asked Maria to marry him, and not just once. It tells me he loves her. It tells me that, quite likely, she had some feelings towards him as well, or he'd probably not have been so persistent. But in the end she decided she loved another more (maybe he was rich).

Such a method of interpretation can be called "mirror reading", or simply "reading between the lines"! And this method is an important part of interpretation. In fact, it's common sense!

I have a whole course that I teach on Galatians at the seminary. But we don't have time here and now to conduct the whole course. So rejoice! There won't be any tests or papers. Today I'm going to share with you the most essential and key conclusions of my course, and I hope they will be illuminating to you. Maybe even shocking.

First, I want to tell you the generally-accepted interpretation of Galatians. It goes like this: After the apostle Paul preached the news of Jesus Christ to the Galatians and they became Christians, there came false teachers preaching Judaism, preaching the Law. They wanted the Galatians to depend on rules and laws rather than grace and faith. Therefore, Paul wrote this epistle to persuade them that grace is enough, that "by grace we are saved, not by works", and law mustn't be added to grace.

Though there are legitimate elements in this interpretation, it is all the same insufficient, and slightly distorted.

And now, on the basis of the Epistle to the Galatians, here is the story of a terrible crisis that took place in the earliest Church of Jesus Christ:

After Paul and his co-workers brought the good news of Christ to the inhabitants of Galatia and established churches there, there came other Christian missionaries from Jerusalem—Hebrew-Christians, too, like Paul—and told the Galatians that Paul had preached an illegitimate gospel to them. Moreover, they claimed that they were authorized and sent by the very Mother Church, Jerusalem. The true Gospel, according to them, went like this: "Inasmuch as Jesus perfectly fulfilled all the requirements of the holy Law, and besides that took away our judgment for our non-fulfillment of it, now the door is open for all to become the children of Abraham, true Jews, receiving the Law and becoming members of the Jewish nation." There's their "gospel".

Notice, for them it wasn't a question of adding laws and rules to grace—no, for them the question was: who is a true son and daughter of Abraham and member of the chosen people? For these Jerusalem missionaries, the Galatians believers had not yet joined the number of Abraham's children and chosen nation. To them, the objective of the Messiah's coming was that finally all the families of the earth could observe the whole Law as the Way of Life.

The generally-accepted interpretation of Galatians says that these false missionaries wanted to add law to grace, to supplement grace with law—grace wasn't "enough", but grace-plus-law would be enough.  But no, in point of fact, they were saying quite the opposite: they wanted to add Jesus Christ to the Law! To "fill out" their Judaism with "Christianity". To them, the Law had always been "enough", only inaccessible because of our human imperfection. But now, thanks to Messiah, the Law is accessible to all. You catch the difference? In their theology, the Law ends up superior to Christ.

Therefore, the epistle to the Galatians isn't an argument between law and grace; it isn't an argument between faith and works—not at all! It's an argument between two gospels, between two missions, between the mission of Paul and the mission of these preachers from Jerusalem. And the essence of the argument goes: how can we become genuine children of Abraham and heirs of God's eternal promise according to His holy covenant? Paul's answer is simple: "Dear (but foolish!) Galatians, you already have become!"; the answer of the Jerusalem preachers is: "No, not yet, not until you enter the Jewish nation."

Now, we're going to take a look at the whole epistle, to pinpoint Paul's arguments for his position, for his Gospel.

More likely than not, the Jerusalem missionaries were saying this to the Galatians: "Paul wants to say that he was the one sent by the mother church and that she authorized his gospel, but don't believe him!" But Paul stuns everybody when he responds "non-programmatically", saying (Read Gal. 1:1-2; 11-13; 15-17). Paul isn't about to play their game: "who did the Jerusalem Church give the green light to and who didn't she give the green light to…." No, he openly announces: God revealed Christ to me and authorized me to reveal Him to you. My gospel isn't from man.

More likely than not, the Jerusalem missionaries were saying this to the Galatians: "Paul came to Jerusalem and promised there that he'd preach our gospel, but he immediately broke his promise." We read about this conference in Acts 15:4-5 (read); there's the faction in the Jerusalem church; this was definitively a political crisis.

And what does the apostle Paul say about this? (Read Gal. 2:1-2). A word about the last assertion: Paul is not saying here that he met in private with the apostles in order to make sure he hadn't been preaching the gospel in vain.  Nothing of the sort. Nowhere in the entire New Testament does Paul ever suggest that he had doubts about his gospel, that he suspected his preaching might be a waste of time. And why would he suddenly do so here, in this epistle of all places? No. He means that he insisted on a private meeting with the apostles to make sure first that they were going to stand with him and his gospel in the open conference, in front of everybody. Otherwise his having come to Jerusalem at all would have been a complete waste of time (idiomatically, "running in vain"). In that case, Paul was ready to say, "So long! I'm outta here. I'm not wasting my time with this" and go back to the work God appointed him to. But Paul never even contemplated the idea of abandoning the Gospel revealed to him by God Himself.

And as we know, the apostles responded to him by… (read 2:9-10).

More likely than not, the Jerusalem missionaries were saying this to the Galatians: "Your precious Paul offended, insulted, Peter himself, and all because Peter—by the way, a Jew!—was observing the Law! How dare he!" Probably the Galatians anticipated a response from Paul like, "No! Never! I would never in my life do something so awful!" But again Paul is an unorthodox disputant. What does he write? (Read 2:11) "Yes, I opposed him—he was wrong! Until the faction from Jerusalem showed up, Peter was happily hanging out with the Gentile brothers in Christ, but as soon as they showed up, he shunned them. That was wrong, and I told brother Peter so."

What do you think? Was it painful to Paul to do that? Of course. Did his reputation among the churches suffer because of it? Of course. Did the false teachers take advantage of it to spread slander about him? Of course. This was a real crisis in the early Church; it was a theological crisis, a political crisis, a spiritual crisis, a soul-searing crisis.

In the third chapter, the apostle adduces the essence of his argument (3:2-3); in other words, "Dear Galatians! You already received the Spirit!!" This one concrete fact concludes the whole thing. God wouldn't have given His Spirit to those who weren't His children. But he did it, when all you had done was believe in Christ. End of argument. There's nothing left to figure out. Paul was within in his rights to end the letter right here—if he could be sure the Galatians would get it. But with a broken heart he says, "Oh, foolish Galatians" and teaches on. He reminds them that God's law never justified anybody, that the promise was given by God when there was no law, that the Law was given to lead us to Christ (while those other preachers were saying the opposite—listen to this, because it's a horror: Christ was given to lead us to the Law!), and Paul again reminds them in chapter four (read 4:4-7); "You already received the Spirit, the Spirit of the very Son; that means you are sons, His children." Then Paul, in heartbreaking terms begs the Galatians: (read 4:12-16).

Then Paul compares these two gospels, that is, the true Gospel of Jesus Christ and the so-called gospel of this faction. The comparison goes from 4:21 to the end of the chapter. We don't have time to examine this in detail. I just want to say that here, where Paul talks allegorically about Sarah and Hagar, about two covenants—the covenant of flesh and the covenant of promise—about two Jerusalems… he is not comparing God's Law and grace; he is not comparing the Old Covenant and New Covenant; he is not comparing Judaism and Christianity. He is comparing his mission, his calling, his gospel and its fruits, with the mission, the gospel and its fruits, of those Jerusalem missionaries. The "present Jerusalem" he talks about here isn't the Law—it is, in fact, the church in Jerusalem! At least, it's the faction from Jerusalem that wants to give birth anew to slaves. Let me say that again: the faction from Jerusalem, claiming the authority of the Jerusalem church, wants once again to give birth to slaves. But we, Paul says, thanks to Christ, belong to the heavenly Jerusalem, we inherit the heavenly promise that resounded once to our father-by-faith Abraham, and like him we have received the promise by faith, thanks to the Son who fulfilled all and unfolded the promised new creation.

That’s why, precisely in light of everything he just said, the apostle exhorts (read 5:1), and also (5:6).

More likely than not, the Jerusalem missionaries were saying this to the Galatians: "Paul summoned you just to believe! But what about how you should live? How are you supposed to know the way of righteousness?"

But Paul answers: (5:16) and again (5:19… etc.). Paul doesn't list all the possible sins here; he's giving them a 'for-instance.' And again (5:22… etc.), Paul doesn't exhaust the list here; again, it's a 'for instance'; he's saying, "All this should be obvious to you; why would you need the Law to know this?".  

You see why these words are written here, at the end of this epistle? If they were written in a different epistle, they'd still mean something, but not what they mean here. This isn't just "the practical section", like we usually say, as if Paul wrapped up the "theological part" and now he says, "Oh, by the way, here's a general list of rules for your life", or as if he totally decided to change the subject (!). Nothing of the sort. If we want to understand chapters 5 and 6 of Galatians right, we have to understand that this whole epistle is one, single theological argument, and the last two chapters are the essential part, where the apostle calls on the Galatians to finally manifest this life that will prove their election and inclusion in God's nation by grace. And that's how the Galatians will finally shut the mouths of the Jerusalem missionaries—they'll be left with absolutely nothing more to say.

By the way, the real climax of the whole epistle is 6:7-8 (read). In other words: Choose! Either the way of the Spirit, Whom you received as per my gospel, or the way of the flesh, as per their 'gospel'—because their pseudo-gospel is in point of fact the way of the flesh, not the way of God's promise, election and new creation.

This is absolutely the climax of the argument. And Paul is ready to sign his name. He seems exhausted. He says ("That's it…", read 6:17) and also (6:14), but he adds one last "punch" for his opponents (read 6:16); it's perfectly obvious in the light of the whole argument he's just made that this "Israel of God" is none other than all believers who've received the true gospel whatever their ethnic origin may be—they are all now "God's Israel". This closing "punch" indubitably drove the Jerusalem faction wild with fury. It's a total negation of their whole pseudo-gospel.

And with love the apostle concludes his epistle, (read 6:18).

Oh, if only that were the end of the crisis. But next time we will see how the continuing crisis compelled Paul to write a letter to… the Romans.