Category Archives: Bible Study

Resurrection in Pauline Literature: Did Paul Incorporate Greco-Roman Apotheosis Mythologies?” Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

PAUL’S THEOLOGY OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST

Paul’s theology of the cross and resurrection of Jesus Christ supports the unifying premise of the New Testament canon, namely that these events “fundamentally altered the reality of the cosmos, whether or not human beings actually recognize that such a cataclysmic change has occurred”[1] or not.  The proclamation, “He is not here, for He has risen just as He said,”[2] is the central focus of Gospel and Epistle.  Evidence to support this is obvious from the primary focus of the New Testament texts.  The Gospel accounts present the crucifixion and resurrection as the climactic event in the life of Christ and as the impetus for the birth of the Church.  The Acts of the Apostles or as some refer to it The Acts of the “Holy Spirit,” detail how the assurance provided by the Holy Spirit as to the veracity of the resurrection of Christ emboldened the apostles and disciples to carry the message of Christ resurrected to the “uttermost parts.”  The epistles show much evidence that the resurrection and all its implications was first and foremost on the minds of the authors.  Revelation of course, presents the resurrected Christ as both bridegroom and Lord of Lords and King of Kings, and as such provides the basis for hope and perseverance until the King comes again.

O’Day[3] argues that in spite of the central focus of the New Testament on the resurrection there is a diversity of form and function with one underlying, unifying theme – God is the focus as the one “who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist.”[4]  This diversity of form and function in turn reveals three themes found within Paul’s Gospel preaching of the resurrection.  Paul’s writing reveals first, that because God’s character is on display through the resurrection, Christians have a sure foundation for faith.  Second, Paul’s Gospel preaching of the resurrection reveals the character of the body of Christ and provides an assurance of hope for the same resurrection.  Third, Paul melds together the first and second functions to define an ethical foundation for the believer and this subsequently becomes the foundation of love within and without the community.

Pauline literature demonstrates the validity of these functions in numerous places. Consider for instance the apostle’s epistle to the Romans.  In 4:16-25 Paul draws attention to the faith of Abraham and the character of God that compelled Abraham to trust Him.  Because Abraham fully believed that God was able to do all that he promised in spite of the deadness of Sarah’s womb, the patriarch pressed on in faith.  It was this faith on the part of the patriarch, faith in the face of the deadness of life in Sarah’s womb that inspired Paul to write that Abraham’s faith was reckoned as righteousness, and not only his but also ours and all who believe in God who raised Jesus.  In presenting Abraham along side of the resurrection Paul deftly demonstrates that his theology sees God as life-giver to the patriarchs, Israel, Christians, and even Jesus Christ.  In this passage Paul clearly demonstrates Jesus as the object of the resurrection and God as the life- giver.  Therefore the Christian faith is grounded in the character of God as life-giver and He rightly receives the praise and glory of His children.

In 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 Paul demonstrates a second function of the Gospel proclamation of resurrection – it shapes the character of God’s people.  The context of life for the Corinthians Paul labors to point out is the death and resurrection of Christ.  Paul states in verses 1-4 that he was faithful to deliver the message of the Gospel – Christ’s death for our sins, His burial, and His resurrection – and it is in those truths that the Corinthian’s faith rested.  Here Paul is forcefully making the point that it is in the resurrection of Christ that Christianity finds identity.  It is the understanding that Christians persevere in this hope with an eye to the future that shapes the believer and gives meaning to living in the present.

In Philippians 2 Paul demonstrates a third characteristic of his theology, namely that the Gospel preaching of the resurrection builds upon God’s character and the hope of the believer to shape individual and community ethics.  After giving a list of exhortations that call all believers’s to demonstrate love, Paul gives the reason – this was the same attitude demonstrated by the incarnated Christ who willingly emptied Himself and suffered humility and death as a demonstration of the love His disciples were to show.  Thus love forms the basis for the new life in Christ and is the change agent of behavior used by the Holy Spirit.  This is the ethics of the resurrection which is in stark contrast to the ethics of the world that Paul characterizes as doing things out of selfish and empty conceit.  This high Christology is in fact antithetical to the prevailing emperor worship cults of the time.

Roetzel believes Paul’s resurrection theology is rooted primarily in his Pharisaism and Jewish apocalypticism.[5]  His argument is sound in that he calls attention to the fact that from the time of the Maccabean revolt and into the first century, a staunch belief in the resurrection was inherent in Jewish apocalypticism.  Likewise, Harrison sees in Paul’s resurrection theology, especially as conveyed to the Thessalonians, a distinct Jewish apocalyptic flavor.[6]  Contrasting Roetzel and Harrison is Bultmann who believed that the Hellenistic church tutored Paul and refined his theology.[7]

The question of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is of supreme importance for Christianity.[8]  It has been rightly stated again and again that Christianity stands or falls on the truth of the resurrection.  Without the resurrection of Christ there is no salvation.  Paul taught that if Jesus Christ was not raised then faith is useless, Christians are still under the bondage of their sins, and the apostles are false witnesses by proclaiming an event that did not happen.  Therefore, the critics who suggest that the resurrection theology of Paul is nothing more than “seed-picking” among the pagan resurrection myths must be answered. 

DID THE PAGAN CONCEPT OF APOTHEOSIS INFLUENCE PAUL?

The issue for a good many critics of Christianity as a whole and of the New Testament specifically rests upon the belief that the resurrection of Jesus Christ is myth built upon the prevailing beliefs of the apotheosis of men of honor and importance.  Liberal scholars are confident in their assertions that Paul transitioned from a purely Jewish theology of a literal, physical, bodily resurrection to a clear Hellenized view influenced largely by Alexandrian Platonism,[9] due no doubt in large part to the teaching of the immortality of the soul.

Did Paul find an ally in the Roman emperor cults and their practice of apotheosis of the emperors in his efforts to deify Jesus Christ?  Are criticisms suggesting that Christianity borrowed pagan myth concerning the deity of Jesus Christ weighty enough to cast doubt upon the testimony of the New Testament concerning Christ as the God-man?  Did Paul’s theology of resurrection undergo development as some have suggested?  These are questions that deserve attention.

Scholarship has demonstrated and acknowledged that the concept of apotheosis, of man becoming divine, has deep roots in Near Eastern cultures long before the Roman conquest of that area.  Drane points out that the Greeks were certainly not the first to hold some type of belief in resurrection of the dead.[10]  The Babylonian Tammuz and Ishtar were mirrored by Osiris and Isis in Egypt and Baal and Anat in Canaan.  It does not follow however that Paul’s thinking on the subject of the resurrection of the dead was borrowed from or influenced by pagan apotheosis.  A doctrine of the resurrection was prevalent within the Talmudic Judaism of Paul’s time.  Indeed, those Jews who denied the resurrection were thought to be excluded from the promise of resurrection.[11]  It is not tenable therefore to assert that Paul had to borrow the concept of resurrection to support his teaching on the subject.

Plevnik insists that Paul’s resurrection theology did not change and did not incorporate outside elements.[12]  He addresses three issues commonly raised by critics from 1 Thessalonians 4 concerning the resurrection.  First, did Paul teach the resurrection of the dead to the Thessalonians during his first encounter with them?  Second, does Paul show a change of perspective concerning the resurrection teaching between 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians?  Finally, what can be learned from the distinctive translation-assumption motif in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-18?  Plevnik suggests that indeed the Thessalonians were informed of the “life with Christ” related to the parousia.  Logically, those who had died in Christ would need to be raised again to life if they were to precede those already living when Christ returned.  This emphasis on translation-assumption adequately addresses the issue of the grieving Thessalonians.  Plevnik demonstrates that the cause of grief among the Thessalonians was not due to the lack of previous teaching concerning the resurrection but was due rather to a misunderstanding of their sharing in the parousia through their translation-assumption.  Additionally, the nine “you know” statements in 1 Thessalonians provide strong support to the belief that Paul did in fact teach the believers about many things concerning the resurrection including the parousia of Christ and what it meant for them.[13]

Another difficulty for critics of Christianity that has not been satisfactorily answered to date is this: how can the Roman myth of apotheosis which involves man becoming god be squared with Christianity which involves exactly the opposite, God becoming man?  The difference in these two positions cannot be underestimated or marginalized by those seeking to make a connection between the two.  The incarnational nature of Jesus Christ as the God-man is a very powerful theme within the Christian faith.

Werblowsky makes the same point in reference to the incarnation when he states it is “unheard of and almost outrageous, unprecedented, unrepeated and unrepeatable . . .”[14]  Werblowsky rightly describes the Christian doctrine of the incarnation as the single most important difference between Christianity and pagan myths of apotheosis.  The barrier between God and man was transcended not by man becoming god but by God becoming man.  Again, the importance of this distinction appears lost on critics of Christianity.  It is not convincing to make an appeal to the similarity of the Roman apotheosis myths and the Christian incarnation doctrine on the basis that both deal with the relationship between humanity and divinity.

While it must be admitted that Paul demonstrates a polemical style toward the imperial cult of emperor worship, most notably in 1 Thessalonians, this does not mean that he borrowed ideas and resurrection themes in order to develop his doctrine of the resurrection of Christ.  Speaking out against the authorities of power both politically and spiritually is a feature of many of the New Testament writers.  That some see in Paul’s writings clear references to the “presence of an aggressive imperial eschatology and the widespread circulation of Augustan apotheosis traditions” supports the point being made in this paper, namely that “Paul injected heavily loaded Roman political terms into his presentation of Christ,” and thus “transformed their ideological content to his theological and social advantage, and thereby overturned the absolutist claims of the imperial cult.”[15]  Speaking to the culture using themes and beliefs they regard as true is always an effective method of persuasion when sharing the Gospel.  Appeals to the probability of the gospel writers as well as Paul incorporating Greco-Roman ideas concerning apotheosis on this basis are misplaced and appear to be a priori assumptions.

Some have raised the issue that the manner of Christ’s death provides proof that He was not the Son of God as Christianity claims.  Celsus for example argued that Christ’s agony in the garden conclusively demonstrated His inability to be divine as no God would or could experience pain or find themselves at the mercy of mere mortals.[16]

Other critics have attempted to equate the resurrection of Christ with the Greco-Roman practice of hero cult worship and even hero translation based on the empty tomb.[17]  Supporters of the empty tomb motif have suggested that either a translation is apparent or most likely the empty tomb was a cenotaph, linking it to hero cult worship.[18]  The weakness of such an assertion is obvious in that a cenotaph presumes first of all that someone has died and secondly that there is in fact a body somewhere.  The Greeks and Romans were unaccustomed to leaving fallen comrades on the battlefield.  Burial was seen as proper and respectful and superstition regarded it as absolutely necessary to avoid offending the spirits of deceased mortals as well as the gods.  When expediency called for leaving the dead behind a memorial was established elsewhere in their honor.  Rightly understood this memorial or cenotaph was an empty tomb.  Thus empty tombs do not in themselves support a theory of translation nor were all empty tombs erected for heroes.  Beyond this, translation almost always represented the avoidance of death by the one translated.  Enoch and Elijah come to mind immediately in the Judeo-Christian tradition while in the Greco-Roman mythologies Ganymede, Herakles, Empedocles, Romulus, Semiramis, Aristeas, Euthymos, and Appollonius all escaped death by being translated and in this act were not immortalized as heroes but instead were thought to have become gods and thus undergone the process of apotheosis.[19]  Given the veneration of relics and especially bones and other artifacts connected to heroes and the cult of hero-worship prevalent in the time of Christ, it is easy to imagine the early church worshipping at the tomb of Christ if they believed that it contained His body.[20]  That they did not is strong evidence they understood the tomb was empty because He had risen.[21]

The Apostle Paul’s presentation of the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is on solid ground.  Bibliographically, internally, and externally the evidence is strong in support of Paul’s teaching as having been informed by Judaism while at the same time decidedly and distinctively what came to be defined as Christian.    Habermas supports this contention and provides a list of eleven historical facts concerning the resurrection that is agreed upon by all scholars regardless of their stance concerning Christianity.[22]  Among the generally accepted historically verifiable facts of note are: that Jesus Christ actually died due to crucifixion, that He was buried afterwards, that His death caused the disciples to experience great despair, that the disciples experienced renewed hope and joy as they witnessed what they believed to be the risen Jesus, that these experiences with the risen Jesus turned the disciples from timid to bold proclaimers of the resurrection, that this message of the resurrection of Jesus was proclaimed openly in the city of Jerusalem, and as a result of this bold preaching the church was born.

In a more recent essay, Habermas refines the discussion even further and insists that the historical evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ cannot be disputed by scholars.  He lists two undisputable facts concerning the resurrection that lie within the historical-natural realm.  The first is that Jesus Christ was crucified and died as a result.  The second is that after He was buried in a tomb His disciples believed that he appeared to them on multiple occasions and that these appearances changed their lives forever.  By arguing these two points alone it is possible to shift the discussion concerning the resurrection to the “home turf” of critics by eliminating the metaphysical and philosophical realms, as they are not entertained.  Debating the supernatural or metaphysical implications of the resurrection on philosophical terms is outside the realm of historical review.  This perspective recognizes a very important distinction between the task of the historian and historical investigation on the one hand and the individual philosophical and/or theological perspectives one might bring to the discussion on the other.  History rightly concerns itself with time and space events.  Arguing the historicity of an event from a metaphysical viewpoint is confusing separate issues.  Thus, “whether this event (the resurrection) was a miracle or whether God raised Jesus from the dead are distinct philosophical questions and must be treated differently from historical questions.”[23]

Of course this is exactly where the Greco-Roman apotheosis mythological argument breaks down – when attempting to make a connection to Pauline teaching concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  Apotheosis depended entirely on the involvement of the gods and operated in the metaphysical and philosophical realms.  Translation of the emperors and heroes occurred without observation or witness and therefore could only be credited to the work of the gods.  There is no historical evidence of post-death appearances of the emperors.  While apotheosis was claimed for many there is no natural, historical, physical evidence to support those claims.  Additionally, locating the bodies of the emperors would have been easy enough.  Shrines, monuments, and mausoleums dotted the landscape of Rome for centuries.  But those marbled edifices to the reign of the emperors held them bound forever, in spite of the public declaration of their rise to divus.

In conclusion at least two points emerge from this analysis.  First, the fact that Paul critiques the emperor worship cults in sometimes pointed and other times veiled language in many of his letters does not mean he adapted their mythology to develop his resurrection teaching.  Second and perhaps more powerful, is the observation that Paul’s well defined Christology demonstrates a clear dichotomy of source, thought, and intent.  Pauline literature when it does touch on emperor worship proclaims Jesus Christ as Lord and Caesar as a pretender.  It is appropriate to remind readers of Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 15:12-19:

“Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?  But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.  Moreover we are even found to be false witnesses of God, because we testified against God that He raised Christ, whom He did not raise, if in fact the dead are not raised.  For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If we have hoped in Christ in this life only, we are of all men most to be pitied.”

The necessity of this reminder is centered on the fact that the teaching of the resurrection of Jesus Christ is central to the Gospel proclamation.  It is not irrelevant to personal and individual faith as some would state.[24]  The resurrection of Jesus Christ is what makes personal faith possible and true.  In Pinnock’s words the resurrection event is based on historical verifiable fact and therefore, “Faith does not claw the air.  It lays hold upon saving verities planted in the fabric of history.”[25]  Paul certainly understood that truth and this in large part may have been responsible for his unflinching consistency concerning the historicity of his resurrection teaching and his refusal to adopt pagan mythologies into his proclamation.

Selected Bibliography

Aageson, James W. “Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 69, no. 1 (Jan. 2007):144-145.

Armstrong, Gail E. “Sacrificial Iconography: Creating History, Making Myth, and Negotiating

Ideology on the Ara Pacis.” Society of Biblical Literature. Annual Meeting 2007.

Ashanin, Charles B. “Backgrounds of Early Christianity.” Church History. 64, no. 4 (Dec. 1995):636-637.

Barram, Michael. “Colossians 3:1-17.” Interpretation. 59, no. 2 (April 2005):188-190.

Bolt, Peter G. “The Empty Tomb of a Hero?” Tyndale Bulletin 47, no. 1 (May 1996): 27-37.

Borchert, Gerald L. “The Resurrection: 1 Corinthians 15.” Review & Expositor. 80, no. 3 (Summer 1983):401-415.

Bush, L Russ. “Apostolic Hermeneutics: “Proof Texts” and the Resurrection.” Criswell Theological Review. 2, (Spring 1988): 291-307.

Cicero, M.T. Cicero – Philippics. trans. W. C. A. Ker. vol. 15;Cambridge 1926.

Cousar, Charles B. “Easter as Promise.” Journal for Preachers. 14 (1991):10-15.

Craig, William Lane. “Dale Allison on Jesus’s Empty Tomb, His Postmortem Appearances, and the Origin of the Disciples’ Belief in His Resurrection.” Philosophia Christi. 10 (2): 293-302.

Croy, N Clayton. “Hellenistic Philosophies and the Preaching of the Resurrection (Acts 17:18, 32).” Novum Testamentum. 39, no. 1 (Jan. 1997): 21-39.

Drane, J.W. “Some Ideas of Resurrection in the New Testament Period,” Tyndale Bulletin. 24 (1973): 99-110.

Edwards, Denis. “Resurrection and the Costs of Evolution: A Dialogue with Rahner on Noninterventionist Theology.” Theological Studies. 67, no. 4 (D 2006): 816-833.

Essex, Keith. “Backgrounds of Early Christianity.” Master’s Seminary Journal. 16, no. 2 (Fall 2005):340-341.

Evans, Craig A. Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005.

________ 2006. “Jesus and Justice.” Ex Auditu. 22:159-175.

Fantin, Joseph D. “Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature.” Bibliotheca Sacra. 164, no. 655 (July-Sept. 2007): 372-373.

Finney, Mark T. “Christ Crucified and the Inversion of Roman Imperial Ideology in 1 Corinthians,” Biblical Theology Bulletin 35, (2005): 20-33.

Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003.

Fox, Robin Lane. Alexander the Great. London: Penguin Books, 1973.

Gundry, Robert H. “The Hellenization of Dominical Tradition and Christianization of Jewish Tradition in the Eschatology of 1-2 Thessalonians.” New Testament Studies. 33, no. 2 (April 1987): 161-178.

Habermas, Gary R. “Jesus’ Resurrection and Contemporary Criticism: An Apologetic.” Criswell   Theological Review. 4, (Fall 1989):159-174.

________ “Jesus’ Resurrection and Contemporary Criticism: An Apologetic (part II). Criswell Theological Review. 4, (Spring 1990): 373-385.

________ “The Recent Evangelical Debate on the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus: A Review Article.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 33, no. 3 (Sept. 1990):375-378.

Hamilton, Neill Quinn. “Resurrection Tradition and the Composition of Mark.” Journal of Biblical Literature. 84, no. 4 (D 1965): 415-421.

Harrison, J R. “Paul and the imperial gospel at Thessaloniki.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 25, no. 1 (Sept. 2002): 71-96.

Hefner, Philip J. “Pannenberg’s Fundamental Challenges to Theology and Science.” Zygon. 36, no. 4 (D 2001): 801-808.

Hill, C E. “Paul’s Understanding of Christ’s Kingdom in I Corinthians 15:20-28.” Novum Testamentum. 30, no. 4 (O 1988):297-320.

Hoerber, Robert G. “Immortality and Resurrection: A Critical Exegetical Study.” Concordia Journal. 3, no. 2 (Mar. 1977): 56-70.

Horseley, Richard A., ed. Paul and Empire. Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997.

Houwelingen, P H R van. “The GreatReunion: The Meaning and Significance of the “Word of the Lord” in 1 Thessalonians  4:13-28.” Calvin Theological Journal. 42, no. 2 (Nov. 2007): 308-324.

Gaffin, Richard B. “The Usefulness of the Cross.” Westminster Theological Journal.41, no. 2 (Spring 1979): 228-246.

Garrison, Roman. The Graeco-Roman context of Early Christian Literature. JSNT Sup 137. Sheffield:Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

Geisler, Norman L. The Battle for the Resurrection. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992.

Geisler, Norman L. and ChadV. Meister. Reasons for Faith: Making a Case for the Christian Faith. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2007.

Gillman, John. “A Thematic Comparison: 1 Cor 15:50-57 and 2 Cor 5:1-5.” Journal of Biblical Literature. 107, no. 3 (Sept. 1988): 439-454.

Goetz, Ronald. “The Resurrection: A Truth Beyond Understanding.” Christian Century. 99, no. 12 (April 1982): 403-406.

Käsemann, Ernst. “Pauline Theology of the Cross.” Interpretation. 24, no. 2 (April 1970): 151-177.

Kearney, Peter J. “He Appeared to 500 Brothers.” Novum Testamentum. 22, no. 3 (July 1980): 264-284.

Keck, Leander E. Jl1984. “Paul and Apocalyptic Theology.” Interpretation. 38, no. 3 (July 1984): 229-241.

Kendall, Daniel, and Gerald O’Collins. “The Uniqueness of the Easter Appearances.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 54, no. 2 (Aprl 1992): 287-307.

Kepple, Robert J. “Hope ofIsrael, the Resurrection of the Dead, and Jesus: A Study of Their Relationship in Acts.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 20, no. 3 (S 1977): 231-241.

Kim, T. H. “The Anarthrous υιος θεου in Mark 15:39 and the Roman Imperial Cult.” Biblica 79 (1998): 222-241.

Kreitzer, L Joseph. D 1990. “Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor.” Biblical Archaeologist. 53, no. 4 (Dec. 1990):211-217.

Lea, Thomas D. “Backgrounds of Early Christianity.” Criswell Theological Review. 7, (Spring 1994): 134-135.

Lüdemann, Gerd. “The Hope of the Early Paul: From the Foundation-preaching at Thessalonika to I Cor 15:51-57.” Perspectives in Religious Studies. 7, no. 3 (Fall 1980): 195-201.

Maier, Harry O. “A Sly Civility: Colossians and Empire.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 27, no. 3 (March 2005): 323-349.

Martin, Brice L. S 1983. “Paul on Christ and the Law.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 26, no. 3 (S 1983): 271-282.

Mearns, Christopher L. “Early Eschatological Development in Paul: The Evidence of 1 Corinthians.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 22 (O 1984):19-35.

Metzger, Bruce M. The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content. Nashville, TN: Abington Press, 1978.

Meyer, Ben F. “Did Paul’s View of the Resurrection of the Dead Undergo Development.” Ex Auditu. 5, (1989): 57-76.

________  “Paul and the Resurrection of the Dead.” Theological Studies. 48, no. 1 (March 1987):157-158.

________ “Resurrection as Humanly Intelligible Destiny.” Ex Auditu. 9, (1993): 12-27.

Migliore, Daniel L. “How Historical is the Resurrection: A Dialogue.” TheologyToday. 33, no. 1 (April 1976): 5-14.

Mitchell, Ella Pearson. “Humble Before the Power of God: A Reflection on Belief, Unbelief, and the Resurrection.” Living Pulpit. 14, no. 2 (Ap-Je 2005): 18-19.

Montgomery, John Warwick., ed. Christianity for the Tough Minded. Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1982.

Morton, Russell. “Die Auferstehung Jesu: Historie, Erfahrung, Theologie.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 57, no. 3 (July 1995): 598-599.

O’Brien, Julia M. “I Corinthians 15:19-26.” Interpretation. 49, no. 2 (April 1995): 182-185.

O’Day, Gail R. “The Variety of Functions of the Proclamation of the Resurrection: A Survey of Epistolary Literature.” Homiletic. 28, no. 2 (Winter 2003): 1-6.

Omerzu, Heike. “Challenging Belief in the Divinity of Jesus as Window Onto the Making of a God.” Society of Biblical Literature. Annual Meeting November 21-25, 2008.

Origen, Contra Celsum 2.9.23.24 GCS Koetschau II/1 135,4-8; 152,11-14; 153,7-10. trans. Chadwick.

Osburn, Carroll D. “1 Enoch 80:2-8 (67:5-7) and Jude 12-13.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 47, no. 2 (April 1985): 296-303.

Otto, Randall E. “If Possible I May Attain the Resurrection from the Dead (Philippians 3:11).” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 57, no. 2 (April 1995): 324-340.

Ovid Illustrated: “The Reception of Ovid’s Metamorphoses in Image and Text” from Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Garth tr., Amsterdam, 1732. Explication of the X. Fable. XV.x Death and Apotheosis of Julius Caesar.

Pachis, Panayotis. “Manufacturing Religion: The Case of Demetra Karapophoros in Ephesos.” Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, November 21-25, 2008.

Pannenberg, Wolfhart. “The Concept of Miracle.” Zygon. 37, no. 3 (S 2002):759-762.

Perkins, Pheme. Resurrection: New Testament Witness and Contemporary Reflection. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984.

Peterson, Jeffrey. “The Extent of Christian Theological Diversity: Pauline Evidence.” Restoration Quarterly. 47, no. 1 (2005): 1-12.

Pfleiderer, Otto. Das Urchristentum, seine Schriften und Lehren in geschichtlichem Zusammenhang. Berlin: Reimer, 1887.

Pinnock, Clark H. “On the Third Day.” Jesus of Nazareth: Saviour and Lord, ed. Carl F. H. Henry. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1966. 

Plevnik, Joseph. “The Destination of the Apostle and of the Faithful: Second Corinthians 4:13b-14 and First Thessalonians 4:14.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 62, no. 1 (Jan. 2000): 83-95.

________ “The Taking up of the Faithful and the Resurrection of the Dead in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 46, no. 2 (April 1984): 274-283.

Pollard, Paul. “Ancient Texts for New Testament Studies: A Guide to the Background Literature.” Restoration Quarterly. 49, no. 2 (2007):114-115.

Reed, Jeffrey T. “Backgrounds of Early Christianity.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 55 (S 1994): 125-126.

Roetzel, Calvin J. “As Dying, and Behold We Live: Death and Resurrection in Paul’s Theology.” Interpretation. 46, no. 1 (Jan. 1992):5-18.

Seneca, Lucius Annaeus. “The Satire of Seneca on the Apotheosis of Claudius.” New York: The Columbia University Press, 1902. Available at http://www.archive.org/details/satireofsenecaon00senerich

Spawforth, Antony J.S. “The Achaean Federal Cult Part 1: Psuedo-Julian, Letters 198.” Tyndale Bulletin 46, no. 1 (1995): 151-168.

Stoutenburg, Dennis C. “Backgrounds of Early Christianity.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 39, no. 1 (March 1996): 152-153.

Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, trans. Robert Graves.Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1957.

The New American Standard Bible, The Lockman Foundation. Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1995.

Thiede, David L. “Apostle on Trial: Building Congregations on Resurrection Hope.” Word & World. 18, (Spring 1998): 136-142.

Thiel, John E. “For What May We Hope? Thoughts on the Eschatological Imagination.” Theological Studies. 67 no. 3 (S 2006)): 517-541.

Turner, George A. “Soteriology in the Gospel of John.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 19, no. 4 (Fall 1976): 271-277.

Webber, Randall C. “A Note on 1 Corinthians 15:3-5.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society. 26, no. 3 (S 1983): 265-269.

Werblowsky, R J Zwi. “Some Reflections on Two-way Traffic: Incarnation/avatara and Apotheosis.” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies. 14, no. 4 (D 1987): 279-285.

________ “What’s in a Name: Reflections on God, gods and the Divine.”  Japanese Journal of Religious Studies. 12, no. 1 (March 1985): 3-16.

Williams, Michael A. “Since Christ Has Been Raised From the Dead.” Presbyterion. 33, no. 2 (Fall 2007): 65-71.

Wright, N.T. “Paul’s Gospel and Caesar’s Empire.” Center of Theological Inquiry. Available at http://www.ctinquiry.org/publications/wright.htm

Versnel, H.S. “Red (herring?): Comments on a New Theory Concerning the Origin of the Triumph,” Numen. 53, no. 3 (2006): 290-326.

     [1]Michael Barram, “Colossians 3:1-17,” Interpretation 59 (April 2005):188-190.

     [2]Matthew 28:6.  Unless otherwise stated all Scripture citations are from The New American Standard Bible, The Lockman Foundation (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1995).

     [3]Gail R. O’Day, “The Variety of Functions of the Proclamation of the Resurrection: A Survey of Epistolary Literature,” Homiletic, 28 (Winter 2003): 1-6.

     [4]Romans 4:17.

     [5]Calvin J. Roetzel, “As Dying, and Behold We Live”: Death and Resurrection in Paul’s Theology, Interpretation, 46 (January 1992): 5-18.

     [6]J. R. Harrison, “Paul and the Imperial Gospel at Thessaloniki,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament. 25 (Spring 2002):71-96.

     [7]See especially Rudolph Bultmann, Theology of the New Testament, trans. Kendrick Grobel (New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1954), 63.  Cited in Roetzel, 6.

     [8]Many beneficial books are in print concerning the topic of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  One that provides clear answers in layman’s terms is, Norman L. Geisler, The Battle for the Resurrection (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1992).

     [9]Otto Pfleiderer, Das Urchristentum, seine Schriften und Lehren in geschichtlichem Zusammenhang (Berlin: Reimer, 1887).  Cited in Ben F. Meyer, “Did Paul’s View of the Resurrection of the Dead Undergo Development?” Ex Auditu. 5 (1989): 57-76.

     [10]J.W. Drane, “Some Ideas of Resurrection in the New Testament Period,” Tyndale Bulletin 24 (1973): 99-110.

     [11]Ibid., 101.  Drane cites the tractate Sanhedrin 90a.

     [12]Joseph Plevnik, “The Taking Up of the Faithful and the Resurrection of the Dead in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.” Catholic Biblical Quarterly. 46 (April 1984): 274-283.

     [13]See 1 Thessalonians 1:5; 2:1, 2, 5, 11; 3:3-4; 4:2; 5:2; cf. 2 Thessalonians 2.5.

     [14]R. J. Werblowsky, “Some Reflections On Two-way Traffic: Incarnation/Avatara and Apotheosis,” Japanese Journal of Religious Studies. 14 (December 1987): 279-285.

     [15]Harrison, 71.

     [16]Origen, Contra Celsum 2.9.23.24 [GCS Koetschau II/1 135,4-8; 152,11-14; 153,7-10; trans. Chadwick]. Cited in Heike Omerzu, “Challenging Belief in the Divinity of Jesus as Window Onto the Making of a God,” Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting November 21-25, 2008.  Available at http://post.queensu.ca/~rsa/  Accessed March 30, 2009.

     [17]Neill Quinn Hamilton, “Resurrection Tradition and the Composition of Mark,” Journal of Biblical Literature. 84 (December 1965): 415-421.

     [18]Prominent in the “translation” hypothesis was Elias Bickermann.  His work entitled “Das leere Grab” appeared in Zeitschrift fur die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft 23, in 1924 and was used by N.Q. Hamilton in his work cited above to support that author’s contention that the empty tomb narrative in Mark was borrowed from the Greco-Roman tradition of hero translation.

     [19]Bolt, 34.

     [20] Pheme Perkins, Resurrection: New Testament Witness and Contemporary Reflection (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1984), 93-94

     [21]William Lane Craig, “Dale Allison on Jesus’s Empty Tomb, His Postmortem Appearances, and the Origin of the Disciples’ Belief in His Resurrection,” Philosophia Christi 10 (2): 293-302.

     [22]Gary R. Habermas, “Jesus’ Resurrection and Contemporary Criticism: An Apologetic,” Criswell Theological Review. 4 (Fall 1989): 159-174.

     [23]Norman L. Geisler and Chad V. Meister, Reasons for Faith: Making a Case for the Christian Faith (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2007), 288.  Habermas’s essay is entitled The Resurrection of Jesus and Recent Agnosticism.  He states that Christians can argue for the validity of the resurrection from two points in a historical context.  The first is that Jesus died and the second is that human witnesses saw Him afterward.

     [24]Michael A. Williams, “Since Christ Has Been Raised From the Dead,” Presbyterion. 33 (Fall 2007): 65-71.  Williams mentions J. Dominic Crossan whom he believes has turned the resurrection of Christ into a metaphor for how people should live – a psychological benchmark but not an actual event that happened to Christ.

     [25]Clark H. Pinnock, “On the Third Day,” Jesus of Nazareth: Saviour and Lord, ed. Carl F. H. Henry (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1966), 153.  Cited in Christianity for the Tough Minded, ed. John Warwick Montgomery (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1982), 251.

“Resurrection in Pauline Literature: Did Paul Incorporate Greco-Roman Apotheosis Mythologies?”

Posted on by
Reply

Modern scholarship has increasingly insisted that Paul borrowed heavily from Hellenized Greco-Roman sources for the formulation of his teaching concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ.  This article will argue that the evidence does not support a belief that Paul developed his resurrection teaching based on Greco-Roman mythologies.  Part one will discuss apotheosis in Greco-Roman culture.   Part two will discuss Paul’s theology of Christ’s resurrection.  Part three will consider potential and alleged relationships between the two subjects.

 

APOTHEOSIS IN GRECO-ROMAN CULTURE

By the time of the New Testament era the Mediterranean world was awash in agnosticism.  Artisans such as Euripides and Aristophanes aided this journey from faith in the gods to skepticism and then to outright cynicism through their sarcastic depictions of the gods in plays and skits.[1]  Seneca contributed his own biting commentary aimed at the dismantling of the gods and goddesses mystique.[2]

Paul’s apologetic evangelism to the Epicureans and Stoics of Athens recorded in Acts 17 and his confrontation with the worshippers of Artemis recorded in Acts 19 reveal remnants of a previous age of veneration of the gods and goddesses of Greek and Roman mythology but should not be confused with evidence of a robust allegiance to the same.  Instead it can be demonstrated by both epigraphy and archaeology as Horseley has done so adeptly,[3] that “the cult of Caesar was not simply one new religion among many in the Roman world.  Already by Paul’s time it had become the dominant cult in a large part of the Empire, certainly in the parts where Paul was active, and was the means whereby the Romans managed to control and govern such huge areas as came under their sway. Who needs armies when they have worship?”[4]

This pronounced cultic worship can be seen in the least as a veneer covering a deeper skepticism toward the gods in the pagan New Testament world.  This rich history of Greek and Roman mythology can be useful however in understanding the rise and development of Christianity.  Garrison for example suggests that “early Christianity firmly rejected Graeco-Roman traditions about the gods”[5]  while at the same time utilized Greek poetry and even philosophy, albeit cautiously in order to further the gospel.  One such area of interest to the modern-day Christian is apotheosis mythology.

Apotheosis, from the Greek aποθεόω, “apotheoō” “to deify,”[6] is the term used to signify the veneration of man to god or divus status.  The apotheosis of individuals was often supported by the sighting of a streaking comet or falling star which was said to be the departed soul of the hero transcending the heavens.  Suetonius noted that after the death of Julius Caesar, “a comet appeared about an hour before sunset and shone for seven days running. This was held to be Caesar’s soul, elevated to heaven; hence the star, now placed above the forehead of his divine image.”[7]

These new gods did not replace the old gods but merely took their place alongside the existing gods as a new branch of gods within the Olympian pantheon.[8]  Initially this was an honor reserved for the deceased but eventually evolved into the Roman emperor cult and worship of emperors as living gods within the Roman Empire of New Testament times.  As such, the deification of select Roman emperors became part of the normal religious experience of Roman citizens.[9]

Ferguson points out that Rome developed their propensity for apotheosis from Greece through the Egyptian Ptolemaic Kings.[10]  While he begins with Alexander the Great others have forcefully suggested that the practice of apotheosis took root within the Greek hero cults as early as 620 B.C.[11]  Versnel reminds readers that the Romans likely developed their triumph and Jupiter imagery not long after this.[12]

In the hero cult ritual, animal sacrifice was performed at the gravesite of a deceased hero as a means to insure continued protection from and influence for good by the departed.  Later, Philip II of Macedon, father of Alexander the Great declared himself a god and during one of his many marriage ceremonies had a statue of himself carried among the images of the Greek gods during the processional.[13]

This was a foreshadowing of the emerging practice of kings and emperors minting coins and commissioning statues of their own images inscribed with declarations of divinity.  Indeed the Greek practice of such has been traced to the reign of Alexander the Great.[14]  Rome eventually adopted the same practice as evidenced by minted coins inscribed with Caesar Parens Patriae (Caesar, Father of the Nation) and by a statue erected in honor of Julius Caesar’s military conquest of the Greek city of Pharsalus in 46 B.C. that bore the inscription Theos Epiphanes (God Made Manifest).[15]  Kim believes that “Gaius Julius Caesar, the founder of the Julian dynasty, is thought to have initiated, though posthumously, the custom of imperial deification.”[16]  It can be argued from Cicero’s account in his second Philippic that Gaius received the honor of deification before his death and if true, would mark the true beginning of Roman apotheosis.[17]  Caesar’s great-nephew, adopted son, and successor Augustus, likewise saw the power of the myth of divinity.  After negotiating with the Senate for his predecessor’s divine honor and commemorating it by hosting games, young Augustus, not more than 28 years old at the time,[18] declared himself a direct descendent of Venus.  The Roman Senate was delighted to honor Venus and built the Ara Pacis Augustae in 13 A.D. in commemoration.  The multiple friezes tell the narrative of the Julian family and their divine ancestry.[19]

Spawforth notes that as early as 54 A.D. the cities of the so-called Achaean League, of which Corinth was chief, petitioned Rome for tax exempt status in order to host emperor worship games.[20]  Finney appears to agree that the imperial cult at Corinth had made enormous inroads by this time and suggests that Paul made it a point to address this situation with the believers there: “underlying Paul’s salutation, and thereafter at numerous and key points in the letter, there is a clearly articulated attempt to undermine the focus of the imperial cult in Corinth.”[21]

Some have argued that Christianity borrowed heavily from Greco-Roman ideas and mythology concerning apotheosis given the cultural saturation of such at the time of the birth of the church and the ministry of the apostles.  Did Paul in fact borrow ideas foreign to Judaism and his understanding of the teachings of Christ to build his doctrine of the resurrection of Jesus Christ?  We must investigate his theology on the subject to derive an answer to that question.

TO BE CONTINUED-NEXT POST – PAUL’S THEOLOGY OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST

     [1]Bruce M. Metzger, The New Testament: Its Background, Growth, and Content (Nashville, TN: Abington Press, 1978), 61.

     [2]Lucius Annaeus Seneca, “The Satire of Seneca on the Apotheosis of Claudius,” (New York: The Columbia University Press, 1902). Available at http://www.archive.org/details/satireofsenecaon00senerich  Accessed April 2, 2009.

     [3]Richard A. Horseley, ed., Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1997).

     [4]N.T. Wright, “Paul’s Gospel and Caesar’s Empire,” Centerof Theological Inquiry. Available at http://www.ctinquiry.org/publications/wright.htm  Accessed March 24, 2009.

     [5]Roman Garrison, The Graeco-Roman Context of Early Christian Literature (Sheffield: Shefield Academic Press, 1997), 1.

     [6]Available at http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/274736  Accessed January 21, 2009.

     [7]Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, translated by Robert Graves (Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1957), 1.88. Cited in Gary R. Habermas, “Resurrection Claims in Non-Christian Religions,” Religious Studies 25, no. 2 (June 1989): 167- 169.

     [8]Panayotis Pachis, “Manufacturing Religion: The Case of Demetra Karapophoros in Ephesos” Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, November 21-25, 2008.  Papers dealt with the subject: Redescribing Graeco-Roman Antiquity.  Available at http://post.queensu.ca/~rsa/redescribing/Panayotits.pdf   Accessed January 21, 2009.

    [9]Joseph. L. Kreitzer, “Apotheosis of the Roman Emperor,” Biblical Archaeologist. 53 (December 1990): 211-217.  Kreitzer suggests that deification was nearly automatic for all emperors unless they had contentious relations with the Senate in which case apotheosis was unlikely to be granted.

     [10]Everett Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2003), 205-209.  The author’s third chapter is a wonderful treatment of the history of veneration from both a religious and political perspective.

     [11]Peter G. Bolt, “The Empty Tomb of a Hero?” Tyndale Bulletin 47.1 (May 1996): 27.  Bolt sites E. Rohde, Psyche: The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality Among the Greeks (London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Truber, 1925) ch. 4; and L.R. Farnell, Greek Hero Cults and Ideas of Immortality (Oxford: Clarendon, 1921) in support of this assertion.

     [12]H.S. Versnel, “Red (herring?): Comments on a New Theory Concerning the Origin of the Triumph,” Numen, 53, no. 3 (2006): 290-326.

     [13]Robin Lane Fox, Alexander the Great (London: Penguin Books, 1973), 20. Cited at http://dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/274736

     [14]Kreitzer, 212.

     [15]Ibid., 212.

     [16]T.H. Kim, “The Anarthrous υιος θεου in Mark 15:39 and the Roman Imperial Cult,” Biblica 79 (1998): 222-241.

     [17]M. T. Cicero, Cicero – Philippics (trans. W. C. A. KER) (vol. 15; Cambridge 1926) 172. Cited in Kim, 228.  In his second Philippic, Cicero refers to Antony as the “priest” (flamen) to divine Julius (divo Iulio).  Scholars believe this was written approximately 44 B.C. which was before Julius’ death.

     [18]Ovid Illustrated: The Reception of Ovid’s Metamorphoses in Image and Text from Ovid’s Metamorphoses (Garth tr., Amsterdam, 1732). Explication of the X. Fable.  [ XV.x Death and Apotheosis of Julius Caesar ]  Available at http://etext.virginia.edu/latin/ovid/banier.html  Accessed March 15, 2009.

     [19]Gail E. Armstrong, “Sacrificial Iconography: Creating History, Making Myth, and Negotiating Ideology on the Ara Pacis,” Society of Biblical Literature 2007 Annual Meeting.  The theme of the annual meeting was “Mythmaking, Fictionalizing, Entextualizing: Creative Moments in Graeco-Roman Religious Reality.”  Available at http://post.queensu.ca/~rsa/redescribing/Armstrong.pdf  Accessed February 15, 2009.

     [20]Anthony J.S. Spawforth, “The Achaean Federal Cult Part 1: Psuedo-Julian, Letters 198,” Tyndale Bulletin, 46, no. 1 (1995), 151.

     [21]Mark T. Finney, “Christ Crucified and the Inversion of Roman Imperial Ideology in 1 Corinthians,” Biblical Theology Bulletin 35, (2005): 20-33.

Becoming a Man of God: Lessons From the Life of David Part 3

Posted on by
1

A Heart Prepared For Worship

I conclude this three-part teaching on becoming a man of God by focusing on the glory of God.  By that I mean the presence of God in our lives.  What will it take to have the glory of God manifested in our lives?  How do we live in such a way that God’s presence is near?

Our text for this segment involves King David seeking to bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem.  Having consolidated his political power in the Holy City, David then moved to  make Jerusalem the religious center as well.

He wants to place the Ark in the Tabernacle he has built and subsequently in a Temple for God he hopes to build.  We know that God did not allow David to build the Temple.  That honor went to David’s son Solomon.

In a sense mankind is pictured in this episode.  Man has been created to know the reality of God and to long for His presence.  There is emptiness within man that can only be filled by the presence of God.

The Hebrew for glory is “kabod.”  The word carries the idea of substance, depth, and weightiness within a context of significance and worth.  I think this is the reason people ask questions such as, “Why am I here?”  “What is my life about?” or “Where is my life heading and why?”  These are all questions related to significance.

It’s very interesting that once a person is born-again those questions become focused on God’s presence.  “How can I draw nearer to God?”  “How can I experience more of God in my life?”   “God, what is your plan for my life?”  These questions relate to God’s significance to us.

Let’s examine a passage of scripture this morning that presents a beautiful picture of the way to experience the glory and presence of God.  I’ve entitled this message “A Heart Prepared For Worship.”

2 Samuel 6:1-23

V1-2 The Ark of the Covenant was the central fixture in the worship of  Israel.  It was placed in the Holy of Holies and was where God’s presence dwelled with the nation.  The OT refers to it as the “Shekinah Glory.”  You may recall that the Ark held the 10 Commandments, Aaron’s rod, and manna that fed the Hebrew people in their desert wanderings.

The Ark was the place where the priest would take a goat one day a year – The Day of Atonement – and sacrifice it there for the sins of the Hebrew people.

Kiriath-jearim (Joshua 15:9) was the ancient name of Baale-judah.  This village was about 9 miles from Jerusalem.

David called together 30,000 Israelites to help him celebrate bringing the Ark to Jerusalem.  At the heart of the issue for David was a longing for the presence of God in his life and in the national life of Israel.  He understood the need to be close to God and it was his heart’s desire to experience that closeness.

We see that in many of the Psalms David wrote.  Psalm 63 for example says:

O God, You are my God; I shall seek You earnestly; My soul thirsts for You, my flesh yearns for You, in a dry and weary land where there is no water. Thus I have seen You in the sanctuary, to see Your power and Your glory.  Because Your lovingkindness is better than life, my lips will praise You.  So I will bless You as long as I live; I will lift up my hands in Your name.  My soul is satisfied as with marrow and fatness, and my mouth offers praises with joyful lips.  When I remember You on my bed, I meditate on You in the night watches, for You have been my help, and in the shadow of Your wings I sing for joy.  My soul clings to You; Your right hand upholds me (v. 1-8).

In Psalm 84 David proclaims:

How lovely are Your dwelling places,  O LORD of hosts! My soul longed and even yearned for the courts of the LORD;  My heart and my flesh sing for joy to the living God.  O LORD God of hosts, hear my prayer;  Give ear, O God of Jacob! Selah.

Behold our shield, O God, and look upon the face of Your anointed.  For a day in Your courts is better than a thousand outside. I would rather stand at the threshold of the house of my God than dwell in the tents of wickedness.  For the LORD God is a sun and shield; The LORD gives grace and glory;  No good thing does He withhold from those who walk uprightly.  O LORD of hosts, how blessed is the man who trusts in You! (v.1-2, 8-12)

V3-5 The Ark was loaded onto a new cart.  This fact is presented because the Philistines sent the Ark back to the Hebrews on a cart.  So the Israelites built a new cart for the Ark and did not use the same cart.

This was a time of celebration and must have been a grand parade.  With 30,000 people playing instruments, shouting, and dancing it must have been quite a spectacle to behold.

V6-11 Along the way the oxen evidently hit a rut and the Ark slid across the cart bed and looked as if it was going to tip over.  Instinctively, Uzzah, one of Abinadab’s sons put his hand out to stop the Ark from falling off the cart.

Can you image the pall that fell upon the people?  Get the picture – the people in front of the cart would not have known about God striking Uzzah dead but the people following the cart would have seen it.  As Uzzah fell to the ground dead all dancing, shouting, and instruments would have fallen into stunned silence.

The cart would have been stopped and slowly one by one the celebrants in front would realize something had gone terribly wrong.  As word spread throughout the crowd all the way to King David, a hushed murmur would have risen as David walked back to the lifeless body of Uzzah.

Notice David’s response.  First anger, then fear, then a decision to abandon the Ark to the household of Obed-edom the Gittite where we are told it stayed for at least 3 months while David returned to Jerusalem with all the people.  That must have been a painfully quiet return to the capital city.

In verse 9 notice the question that David asks perhaps out loud “How can the Ark of the Lord come to me?”  That’s a key question in this passage that we’ll answer in a moment.

V12-15 When we read this account we ask what is different from the previous account of David bringing the Ark to Jerusalem?  We notice that they stopped every 6 paces and sacrificed.  Something else had happened though.

While the Ark was in the house of Obed-edom David returned to Jerusalem and sought an answer to the question he asked in verse 9 – how could he bring the Ark to Jerusalem.  We find the answer to that question in 1 Chronicles 15:1-2, 11-15.

1Now David built houses for himself in the city of David; and he prepared a place for the ark of God and pitched a tent for it.

2Then David said, “No one is to carry the ark of God but the Levites; for the LORD chose them to carry the ark of God and to minister to Him forever.”

11Then David called for Zadok and Abiathar the priests, and for the Levites, for Uriel, Asaiah, Joel, Shemaiah, Eliel and Amminadab,

12and said to them, “You are the heads of the fathers’ households of the Levites; consecrate yourselves both you and your relatives, that you may bring up the ark of the LORD God of Israel to the place that I have prepared for it.

13″Because you did not carry it at the first, the LORD our God made an outburst on us, for we did not seek Him according to the ordinance.”

14So the priests and the Levites consecrated themselves to bring up the ark of the LORD God of Israel.

15The sons of the Levites carried the ark of God on their shoulders with the poles thereon, as Moses had commanded according to the word of the LORD.

This passage recounts for us that David researched the Ark and how it was to be transported.  This led him to read Exodus 25 where the specific instructions for transporting the Ark are found.

V16-23 Michal was David’s first wife given to him by King Saul as a gesture of goodwill for David’s heroic military conquests.  When God removed His blessing and anointing from Saul one of the first things he did was give Michal to another man as a wife.  She obviously believed her husband acted inappropriately before the “common people.”

What does this chapter, this singular event in the life of David have to tell us?  What can we take away from this that will help us in our personal lives and in our responsibilities to our families and our church?  More importantly what is this story telling us about the heart of a person who worships God?

The first thing we can say is that the person who worships God must have a passion for His presence.  David’s heart was aflame with a desire to have God’s presence near.  This is what motivated him to go get the Ark in the first place.

But here lies our first warning as well.  It is not enough to have the right motivation.  David certainly had the right motivation.  Our motivation must be coupled with a right method.  This is where David went wrong.

David neglected the Word of God that gave specific instructions on how the Ark was to be transported.  Notice that the Israelites built a brand new cart to haul the Ark.  Why did they do that?

Partly because none of the priests knew God’s Word enough to say “hey wait a minute David.  God says only the Levites are to transport the Ark and they must bear the burden on poles.  It cannot be touched.”

The other reason is that they were quick to mimic what the Philistines had done.  This enemy of the Israelites had sent the Ark away from them on a cart and thus the Hebrew people didn’t think a thing about utilizing the same method.

Brethren, the cart in this chapter represents the world’s ways.  David was guilty of copying the world in approaching God.  We must understand that God is not impressed with our good motives fulfilled in the wrong ways.

The old adage is right – the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Notice the results in V6-11 of doing things the world’s way.  When we do things the world’s way there will be death.  People will be hurt.  If we want God’s presence we must do things God’s way.  If we want God’s blessings then we must join together our right motives with God’s prescribed method of approaching Him.

Some people read this account of Uzzah’s death and say that God is unfair or that He is unduly harsh.  They rationalize that Uzzah was trying to do a good thing.  He was trying to help God by preventing  the Ark from falling to the ground.

The problem with that thinking is that people overlook a fundamental truth – God doesn’t need our help.  How often do we think that we need to reach out our hands to steady a “work of God?”  How often are we tempted to lend a hand to God because His glory and honor are slipping or falling in the world’s eyes?

Notice a 2nd result of seeking God’s presence using the world’s methods – it results in anger and bitterness toward the Lord. David was one of those people who thought God was totally unfair to do what He did.  This wrong attitude in turn led to fear.

David became afraid of the presence of God.  What started out as a good thing – desiring the presence of God and setting in motion plans to accomplish that, turned into a disaster which in turn led David away from the God he longed to be near.

I see a very vivid picture of the church in this section of David’s story.  The church says that they desire the presence of God more than anything (Well, some churches say that).

The motives may be right – desiring the presence of God – but the method is terribly wrong.  So many churches today employee Madison Avenue marketing techniques that is completely foreign to God’s Word.

Many churches today look at people as consumers.  So the goal for many churches today is to satisfy their customers.  Churches conduct polls and surveys asking lost people what it would take to get them to come to church.  Once the data is analyzed the church morphs into whatever the survey says.

People today are looking for entertainment in a church so the pastor becomes a comedian and the service becomes a fast-moving collage of drama, songs, skits, and sermonettes all designed to satisfy the pew consumer.

When numbers become the goal God is not glorified.  David assembled 30,000 worshippers and they were all shouting and singing and playing instruments but notice that God was not being glorified because He was not being worshipped the right way and so disaster struck.  It was a great religious show but it was void of God.

Here it was physical death.  Today it is spiritual death.  People are coming and going through the doors of our churches dead spiritually because they are not hearing the life changing Word of God.  People cannot be saved by meeting their felt needs.  Salvation comes through recognition that we are sinners saved by grace.

I remember John Courson talking about this church growth/marketing phenomenon.  He spoke about a group of churches uniting in a campaign to reach their city.  So they got a steering team together.  Sort of an ad hock board.

This board consisted of some movers and shakers in the community.  They decided that what they needed was a big wheel, a name, or several names to come into town and show folks how cool it was to be a Christian.  The implication was of course that anyone could be as successful as they if they would become a Christian.

Courson concluded his story with this comment – “boards and big wheels.  That’s a perfect description of a cart.”  Brothers, God will not bless our carts.  He will not bless our slick programs, our techniques and methods that we’ve co-opted from the world.

You know the Levites carried the Ark of the Covenant around the Sinai desert for nearly 38 years and never stumbled.  They carried the Ark through dry river beds over rocky terrain and never stumbled.  The Levites carried the Ark around the city of Jericho for seven days and never once stumbled.

God didn’t need a cart then and He doesn’t need one now.  God says to His people – you carry Me.  You shoulder Me in your hearts and you carry Me everywhere you go.

In verse 13 we see a picture of David’s right understanding of the holiness of God.  I’ve already mentioned that Kiriath-jearim was 9 miles from Jerusalem.  Can you imagine how long it would take you to walk 9 miles if you stopped every 6 steps and offered a sacrifice?

Why did he do this?  A few answers have been offered but I believe that the literal and symbolic meet here to provide us an answer.  The number 6 is the number of man in Scripture.  I think David was proclaiming before God symbolically and literally that man alone can not come before a holy God.  It is only through the blood.

In order for mankind to be reconciled to God we must approach Him in the prescribed manner – through the blood of Jesus Christ.

In verse 14 we read that David danced before the Lord with all his might wearing a linen ephod.  What is that telling us?  It means that David gave all to God and that he did so as a man not as a King.

The same must be true of us.  We do not approach God on our own merits.  We might be a business owner, a wealthy merchant, an important political figure.  God says that we will take off those robes of importance and approach Him as every other person.

We can understand “dancing with all our might” within a context of diligence.

Hebrews 11:6 says, “He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.”

Jeremiah 29:13: “And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for Me with all your heart.”

Proverbs 8:17: “I love those who love Me and those who seek Me diligently will find Me.”

Proverbs 13:4: “The soul of a lazy man desires and has nothing; but the soul of the diligent shall be made rich.”

One last item I want you to see in this passage.  Verse 20 tells us of Michal’s disgust with her husband.  This pictures for us the truth that even though we may diligently seek God’s presence and His glory in our lives there will be those who stand in opposition.

See how this develops.  David is “jazzed.”  He has glorified God and experienced His presence by bringing the Ark to Jerusalem.  He has blessed the people and sent them home to celebrate.  Now he comes to his own home wanting to bless his family and gets a bucket of cold water on the head.

There will always be someone who says “don’t get too crazy or wrapped up in the God thing.”  They might tell you “it’s ok to go to church on Sunday but do you have to read your Bible all the time and pray everyday?”

You keep on trucking brethren.  Notice the outcome of all those who attempt to sidetrack those who desire to diligently seek the Lord’s glory – verse 23 – they will be barren.  Misery loves company as they say and those who are spiritually empty cannot stand being in the presence of those who are spiritually full.

Let me share this real story with you.  In his book, The Unquenchable Worshiper Matt Redman, who has written so many wonderful praise and worship songs, tells the story of how he came to write the song, “The Heart of Worship.”

The church Matt attended had been incredibly blessed w/some fantastic musicians & composers.  The worship was incredible.  But after a time, something went missing.  As the bands became more proficient & the sound improved the sense of God’s presence diminished.

In Matt’s words, “The fire that used to characterize our worship had somehow grown cold.”  Where once people would enter in no matter what, we’d now wait to see what the band was like first, how good the sound was, or whether we were ‘into’ the songs chosen.”

The pastor, Mike Pilavachi, decided to take some radical steps to turn things around.  So one Sunday when the congregation arrived, they discovered the sound system had been removed & there was no one to lead worship.

Mike said, “When you come through the doors of the church on Sunday, what are you bringing as your offering to God? What are you going to sacrifice today?”

The first few meetings after that were awkward as people struggled to learn that true worship means offering one’s heart to God.  Giving expression to that was difficult at first, but over several weeks, people realized worship is about more than singing songs.

It didn’t take long before the power & presence of God was renewed as they gathered to worship.

Over the next weeks they added the instruments back in.  Matt shares, “Out of this season, I reflected on where we had come to as a church & wrote this song,”

When the music fades, All is stripped away, & I simply come;
Longing just to bring something that’s of worth That will bless Your heart.
I’ll bring You more than a song, For a song in itself Is not what You have required.
You search much deeper within Through the way things appear; You’re looking into my heart.
I’m coming back to the heart of worship, & it’s all about You, All about You, Jesus.
I’m sorry, Lord, for the thing I’ve made it, When it’s all about You, All about You, Jesus.

Brethren there is one thing God desires for us to carry into this world.  It is not our fancy clothes, fancy houses, or expensive cars.

It is a changed life by the power of the Holy Spirit.  It is a testimony about the goodness of God verified by a heart that seeks Him above all else.  That is the Gospel message of salvation in His Son that is written on our hearts.

When we seek God’s presence in our lives and are diligent to live for his glory then His joy and enabling power to live for him comes washing through our souls like a refreshing river.  That is my prayer for you my readers.

As we walk this journey together may we be an encouragement to one another in godly living.

Becoming a Man of God: Lessons from the Life of David Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

A Man After God’s Own Heart

 

King David is often referred to as the “Shepherd King.”  He spent his adolescent and young teenage years tending his father’s sheep as we will see in this study.  I believe it was from that foundation of servant hood, being seen and treated as the least among his brethren that David developed into a man of integrity, honor, and humbleness.

As a king, David was no hireling.  He loved the people of Israeland was a faithful shepherd to them.  I recommend the book by Philip Keller, “A Shepherd Looks at the 23rd Psalm.”  Keller paints a beautiful picture in words of the life of a shepherd and the sheep he cares for.

The Bible says that hirelings get out in front of the slowest sheep when the wolves come.  Hirelings take off and leave the sheep unprotected.  David never did that.  Instead he protected them against all sort of wild animals.

That reminds me of the story I heard recently about the two friends that went on an overnight camping trip to the mountains. 

In the middle of the night they were both awakened by a ferocious roar of what they both knew was a grizzly bear.  They both sat up in their cots frantically trying to get out of their sleeping bags and out of the tent before the bear was upon them.

In the midst of this mad scramble one guy looks at his friend and the friend is putting on his tennis shoes.  The first guy half yelled “you don’t have time for that and putting on your tennis shoes won’t help you out run the bear.”

His friend responded “I don’t have to out run the bear.  I only have to outrun you.”

The Bible speaks more about David than any other person except Jesus Christ.  Consider for example that:

  • 14 chapters about Abraham, the father of the faithful.
  • 14 chapters about Joseph whom God used to preserve His people.
  • 13 chapters about Jacob the patriarch who wrestled with God.
  • 10 chapters about Elijah the prophet who slew 400 false prophets.

But there are ~ 65 chapters of the Bible dedicated to the life of David.  The NT mentions David 59 times.  This affords a comprehensive view of the life of this man.  I believe God holds David up as an example of “a man after His own heart” because David’s heart was always seeking after Him.

I love the picture that God gives us of David – his triumphs, his victories, his greatest moments all right along side of his failures, his defects, and his sins.

I want to look at 1 Samuel 16.  Let me set the context of what we’ll be studying.

The date is around 1126 BC. Israel left Egypt about 340 years before this time and thus had been in the Promised Land about 300 years.  Within those 300 years was a 240 year period of time known as the “time of the judges.”  People such as Samson, Gideon, Deborah, Abimelech, and Jepthah had given counsel to and provided protection for God’s people.

You may recall that the book of Judges closes with this statement: “In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.”  It was at this time that God raised up Samuel the prophet who in effect became the last judge.

It was to Samuel that the Israelites came begging for a king because they wanted to be like other nations.  There’s a lesson there for us – it is always a sign of danger ahead when God’s people decide to imitate the world.

So, Samuel eventually anoints Saul as Israel’s first king.  We read about that in chapters 9-10 of 1 Samuel.  Saul’s reign was marked by victory and defeat. 

God removed the kingdom from him because he did not obey Him in all that he was instructed – first by offering strange fire before the Lord (1 Sam 13) and then by disobeying God’s instructions to completely wipe out the Amalekites (1 Sam 15).

Samuel’s announcement to Saul is a key to understanding the text we will consider.  Samuel the prophet speaks thusly to King Saul in 1 Samuel 13:14:

“But now your kingdom shall not endure.  The Lord has sought out for Himself a man after His own heart, and the Lord has appointed him as ruler over His people, because you have not kept what the Lord commanded you.”

1 Samuel 16:1-13

V1 Samuel was still grieving.  I think this is an important point being made here.  Why would God include this piece of information?  Saul had messed up and God rejected him.  What I see here is that the man of God grieves for God’s people who have fallen into sin.  There is a time to grieve for our brothers and sisters.

There should be no joy in the heart of a believer when a brother or sister falls.  We may know that it was self-induced.  We may have even seen it coming and tried to warn them but when it comes there should be a sense of heartache.

Notice God asks Samuel “how long” he is going to grieve.  God is saying “let’s get up and get back to work.”  That tells me that grieving should not be debilitating.  It should not cause us to forget about the tasks God has called us to.

God instructs Samuel to fill his horn with oil.  What a picture that is.  The horn represents strength in the Bible and oil represents the Holy Spirit.  God is saying to Samuel “I am sending you forth in the strength of the Holy Spirit.”

It’s important for us to remember that regardless of the circumstances we might find ourselves facing, God is with us and His strength is our strength.  We never face our obstacles alone.  When we obey God we always move forward filled with the Holy Spirit.

V2 As is often the case, we miss God’s encouragement and provision.  Samuel’s eyes were not focusing on the Lord any longer but on the fate of Saul and the potential for Saul’s anger to turn toward him.

Here’s another lesson for us.  When God calls us to a work He will strengthen us for it and provide the enabling to do it.  “Where God guides God provides.” If we keep looking to Him for this provision we will succeed.  When we take our eyes off of Him and examine our circumstances we give doubt and anxiety an open door.

I love God’s response to Samuel’s fear – “Here’s the plan.  Take a heifer with you and go make a sacrifice.”  God is saying “listen to Me Samuel.  I’ve got this under control.  Do as I ask.”

V3 God gives Samuel just enough information to get him to the right place in front of the right people.  Do you see the important piece of information that God withholds?  God did not tell Samuel to anoint the tallest or the strongest or the most handsome.  God didn’t give Samuel a name.  He didn’t ask for Samuel’s opinion at all.  He merely told Samuel to anoint the one that He would designate.

That took the burden off Samuel didn’t it?  All Samuel had to do was go to Jesse’s house and wait for God to tell him which man to anoint as the next King of Israel. 

We can walk with great confidence when we understand that following God’s plan to the letter releases us from the burden of making sure something is successful.

When we listen to God and don’t attempt to “tweak” His plans we can rest in the knowledge that whatever God chooses is the best possible choice.  That’s true freedom.

  • So from this verse we learn that God calls people to walk by faith. He calls us to trust Him with the results.
  • We can also say that God desires constant communication with us.  He gives us enough information to take the next step in obedience to Him.  That insures that we will not get too far ahead.
  • That segues into a 3rd point here – God wants us to be continually dependent upon Him.

V4 “So Samuel did as the Lord said.”  That’s a great statement.  After receiving instruction from God, Samuel carried those instructions out.

The elders of the city of Bethlehem were concerned because “the” prophet of God, the judge of Israel, the King’s closest advisor had come to their Podunk village unannounced.  That caused a near panic.  We’re not told why exactly.  They rightly thought he was there for a specific reason.

V5 Samuel calms their fears and invites them to the sacrifice.  What he doesn’t tell them is this is a sacrifice of consecration.  Someone is about to be “set apart” for service to the Lord.  This awareness was mysteriously lost upon them.

  • Point – God will always consecrate or set apart a man for service.  God has His own qualifications that look nothing like what the world thinks is important.
  • I’ve seen a few men over the years that have claimed God told them to become a pastor.  Time has demonstrated that their calling was not from God.

V6-10 We see in these verses that God looks at the heart of a man not the outward appearance.  Outward appearance means the total package of externals including our words and our actions.  When the internals are not right then the externals don’t matter to God.

In America we teach young people to aggressively “sell themselves.”  We tell them that “first impressions” are the most important.  The result has been what we see today – inflated egos and inflated resumes.

God sees through all the “veneer.”  He doesn’t need our talents, abilities, or experiences in order to accomplish His plans through us.  All He needs is a man with a right heart.

Alan Redpath said “Jesse’s seven sons represented the perfection of the flesh.  Outwardly they fit the criteria but God is no interested in refining the flesh.  When God chooses to build a man He looks for different timber.”

So the man of God understands that the basis for God’s choice is contrary to human reasoning.  This in turn will deliver us from the tyranny of judging people without knowing the heart.  I have shared my testimony before and a part of that testimony is that I can’t believe that God chose me to be one of His.

Perhaps that is your testimony too.  God’s grace toward us is not an occasion for boasting or haughtiness.  Instead experiencing God’s love toward us should cause us to be humble.

  • Paul in writing to the Corinthian believers said:  “What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?” (1 Cor 4:7)

We should remember that when it comes to sharing our faith and living for Christ.  We don’t know who God is going to call into His Kingdom nor should we care.  God will call whom He will call.  Our job is be ready “in season and out of season” to share a word of encouragement when the opportunity presents itself. 

I see those points being made next – V11-13

I think God delights in choosing those the world least expects.  Paul said exactly that in 1 Corinthians 1:

  • “Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, so that no man may boast before God” (v25-29).

Why does God do that?  Well I don’t pretend to know the mind of God but I will say that I believe one reason God chooses the least expected option is because that way He gets all the glory.  It’s easy to give God the glory when great things are accomplished through ordinary people.

We can look to our own heritage as Calvary Chapel and know this is true.  Pastor Chuck in obedience agreed to pastor a little church called Calvary Chapel that boasted a congregation of 25 people.

Most people don’t know that Bob Coy was the “go to” guy for making sure rock stars inDetroithad a good time.  Most people don’t know that Greg Laurie was a drug dealer and user or that Mike Macintosh was so strung out on drugs at one point he didn’t think he would survive mentally.

I look at an uneducated shoe salesman like DL Moody and think wow!  Who had ever heard of Billy Graham?  He didn’t come up through the right seminary and church group.  All of these men have one thing in common – they had a right heart before God.

This was God’s testimony about David.  He was a man “after” God’s own heart.  I think this means David longed to be near God and to hear from Him.

  • As the deer pants for the water brooks, so my soul pants for You, O God.  My soul thirsts for God, for the living God; When shall I come and appear before God? (Ps 42:1-2)
  • One thing I have asked from the LORD, that I shall seek: That I may dwell in the house of the LORD all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the LORD and to meditate in His temple. (Ps 27:4)

One of the things that I want you to take away from this passage is that David is not the exception.  I don’t want you to look at his life and say “yea but . . .”  David’s life is presented to us in Scripture as a model of what can be for every man of God.

  • “For the eyes of the LORD move to and fro throughout the earth that He may strongly support those whose heart is completely His” (2 Chronicles 16:9)

God is looking for men whose hearts are completely His.  There’s nothing hidden or being held onto;  nothing being swept under the rug, nothing being ignored.

So God is holding up David as an example to us and says “learn from this picture.  Be a man whose supreme desire is to know Me and to be known by Me.”

David’s heart was in-tune with God and because of that he could cry even in the most burdensome times “create in me a clean heart oh God.”  Oh for a walk like that.

What will that take on our part?  At least two things.

1)    We must learn to see as God sees.  This will require us to spend much more time on the preparation of our hearts for God than it does on the preparation of our outward appearance.  This will require us to work on the “issues” of the heart continually, to bring our thoughts and our wills into conformity to His.

2)    We must learn to constantly check our priorities.  What am I spending the most time on?  What do I spend the least time on?  Are there things that I should move up the list or down the list?

May God bless you abundantly according to His riches today.

Spiritual Formation as Spiritual Deception: Beware the Peddlers of Grace (Part 1)

Posted on by
9

sanctification

This article will investigate the biblical teaching of the sanctification of the believer in light of current spiritual formation teaching.  Research will be presented showing that the historic Christian theistic understanding and teaching concerning sanctification has been obfuscated today by the so-called spirituality of spiritual formation teaching.  Part one will offer an analysis of the importance of the biblical teaching on sanctification.  Part two will present the ways that sanctification has been understood in the church historically.  Part three will detail the recent re-interpretations of sanctification from within the spiritual formation perspective.  Part four will suggest a corrective to the current path of teaching on spirituality and suggest a return to biblical sanctification.  Part five will present a summation of what is at stake for the church if it does not heed this call.

This effort will rely primarily on an article written by Steven L. Porter that appeared in the September 2002 issue of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society.  In his article Porter suggests that what is needed today is a more robust systematic theology related to the doctrine of sanctification.  It is the position of this writer that what is needed today is much more than a systematic treatment of spiritual formation.  Instead of seeking a bigger tent to encompass all the expressions of evangelical spiritual formation and disciplines today, an evaluation of the practices themselves will reveal a need to return to the biblical teaching on sanctification.

The Importance of Teaching Biblical Sanctification

The Apostle Paul wrote to the Galatians to exhort readers to continue their Christian life and thereby their sanctification by faith.  His question to the Galatians then and to readers of this article today is equally appropriate: “Did you receive the Spirit by works of the Law, or by hearing with faith.”[1]  In other words did you gain life in Christ by your efforts or by the Holy Spirit?  Clearly, we are saved by grace[2] and the Scriptures teach that we are sanctified in the same manner.

Addressing an age-old issue is at the heart of this question by the apostle to the Galatians.  Mankind has a demonstrated tendency to stray from the path of divine instruction and end up on a path of its own making and choosing.  Paul’s letter to the Colossians provides a ready example of this truth.  The apostle asked the Colossians a question similar to the one he asked of the Galatians: “If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, ‘do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!’”  The point the apostle makes here is that the types of activities the Colossians were submitting themselves to could not secure the grace of sanctification being touted by the false teachers of the day and was in fact without warrant based on the teachings of Jesus Christ.

It is important to understand the biblical teaching on sanctification precisely because there has developed a plethora of methods suggesting that sanctification is predominantly the responsibility of the individual believer to achieve by whatever means the individual deems experientially satisfying.[3]  While it is true that sanctification has an experiential aspect, i.e., we are called to “work out our salvation,” it cannot be maintained that individuals are free to subscribe to any method of their choosing.  That does not stop many professing Christians from attempting self-sanctification through extra-biblical means though.  Witness for instance the variety of Purpose Driven emphases, the myriad spiritual, marriage, and youth retreats, self-help study groups, recovery groups, care groups, healing and dealing with specific issues of life groups, and the thousands of books on the so-called spiritual formation techniques of contemplative prayer, mystical silence and solitude of the soul, labyrinth walking, chanting, and visualization.  The sincerity of the creators and authors of these techniques and the eagerness of practitioners to indulge themselves in these techniques is not being questioned in this paper.  The validity of what they are practicing and urging others to engage in under the guise of spiritual growth, formation, and discipline is being questioned however.  This concern underscores the urgent need to speak directly to the evangelical Church of its need to understand and teach as a core doctrine the subject of the biblical method for the sanctification of the believer.

We are instructed in Scripture to discipline ourselves as a means to godliness.[4]  Therefore being holy is a goal of every Christian.  Does it follow that whatever technique or process deemed useful by a Christian is acceptable to God?  Following that practice has surely led Christians outside the boundaries of how God has determined He will be approached and how His people will grow in sanctification.  Mystical experiences and pragmatic techniques are nowhere called for in the Scriptures as a means to godliness.  One of the reasons the Reformers advocated Sola Scriptura was to evaluate and eliminate those teachings outside the warrant of Scripture.  It appears the modern Protestant evangelical Church has forgotten this principle.

 IN THE NEXT POST I WILL EXAMINE SANCTIFICATION FROM AN HISTORICAL AND EVANGELICAL PERSPECTIVE

Read part Two here.

[1]Galatians 3:2. Unless otherwise stated all Scripture references are from The New American Standard Bible, Updated 1995, The Lockman Foundation (Chicago: Moody Press, 1995).

[2]Ephesians 2:8.

[3]Dallas Willard for example states that spirituality/sanctification is achieved by emulating the lifestyle of Jesus.  He refers to this as the “easy yoke” of Christ and asserts that in “this truth lies the secret of the easy yoke: the secret involves living as He lived in the entirety of His life – adopting His overall lifestyle  . . . We have to discover how to enter into his disciplines from where we stand today – and no doubt, how to extend and amplify them to suit our needy cases.”  The Spirit of the Disciplines, (HarperCollins: New York, NY: 1991), 5, 9.

[4]1 Timothy 4:7.

Photo credit Young Nak Celebration Church