1 Timothy 6:11-16
Instead of pursuing riches, Paul tells Timothy to pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness. Timothy is to fight to attain these things until the appearing of Jesus Christ. I could easily spend my whole life pursuing one of these things. Actually, I'm sure I could spend my whole life studying what just one of these things means exactly. The sense that I get from this passage is that this fight is supposed to be a long, steady one - more of a long, steady climb rather than interval training. This is not good news for me - I get really bored on long, steady climbs; they are the type of execercise that I hate the most!!
It amazes me that money and the pursuit of riches has had such a hold on humanity from ancient times until the present. This passage (and the one preceding it) could have been written directly to us today.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Taking a shot at the prosperity gospel
1 Timothy 6:3-10
Paul draws a direct connection between false doctrines and the thought that godliness is a means to financial gain. Maybe my understanding of the prosperity gospel is faulty but I would think that this a direct shot at the heart of their teaching. Paul doesn't allow for any sort of "sow a seed" type talk here. This is somewhat timely since one of our "esteemed" media institutions here in town has recently had a complaint against it sent to the CRTC because they have been promising spiritual or financial reward if people would send them cash. The funny thing is that the complaint is coming from a pastor in Saskatchewan who sent them money basically as an investment strategy (sow a seed and you will reap the harvest) and when he didn't make a windfall off of God he complained to the CRTC. "People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction."
I have been challenged recently to take a look at my life, especially in the area of financial waste and to try to simplify. Paul's statement in v. 8 is the heart of simplification: "But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that." This is a matter of justice and stewardship. I can use my money to bring even a small measure of justice and equality to the world rather than just using it for selfish comforts. I think that's a better use of what God has given me. I wonder if it grieves the heart of God when he sees the wealthy church of North America not motivated to action on behalf of the "least of these" in their own backyards and around the world. I wonder what would happen if the wealthy church of North America would learn to be content with food and clothing (and I don't think Paul is saying to be content because they are designer labels or super cool clothes - I think he is saying to be content that you have something to wear) and used their excess to restore justice. I wonder what would happen if I had this heart...
Paul draws a direct connection between false doctrines and the thought that godliness is a means to financial gain. Maybe my understanding of the prosperity gospel is faulty but I would think that this a direct shot at the heart of their teaching. Paul doesn't allow for any sort of "sow a seed" type talk here. This is somewhat timely since one of our "esteemed" media institutions here in town has recently had a complaint against it sent to the CRTC because they have been promising spiritual or financial reward if people would send them cash. The funny thing is that the complaint is coming from a pastor in Saskatchewan who sent them money basically as an investment strategy (sow a seed and you will reap the harvest) and when he didn't make a windfall off of God he complained to the CRTC. "People who want to get rich fall into temptation and a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires that plunge men into ruin and destruction."
I have been challenged recently to take a look at my life, especially in the area of financial waste and to try to simplify. Paul's statement in v. 8 is the heart of simplification: "But if we have food and clothing, we will be content with that." This is a matter of justice and stewardship. I can use my money to bring even a small measure of justice and equality to the world rather than just using it for selfish comforts. I think that's a better use of what God has given me. I wonder if it grieves the heart of God when he sees the wealthy church of North America not motivated to action on behalf of the "least of these" in their own backyards and around the world. I wonder what would happen if the wealthy church of North America would learn to be content with food and clothing (and I don't think Paul is saying to be content because they are designer labels or super cool clothes - I think he is saying to be content that you have something to wear) and used their excess to restore justice. I wonder what would happen if I had this heart...
Monday, February 26, 2007
Pulling splinters
1 Timothy 6:1-2
When I read a passage like this, I almost always say something like: "Yeah, but what about the other guy?" This passage is telling slaves (in our context it can be applied to employees) to treat their masters (managers) with full respect so that God's name and the apostle's teaching would not be slandered. It's funny to me how often we apply other people's lives to God's Word when he wants me to apply my own life to it. If I get too close to being convicted about how I treat or respect those in authority over me I immediately start blaming the boss: "if he treated me better", "I thought he was supposed to be a Christian", etc. Rather than letting God's Word speak to me I start to defend and deflect.
This is probably what Jesus was talking about when he said not to pull splinters out of somebody's eye until you've gotten rid of the plank in your own. God, speak to me through your Word and help me to pull the planks out of my own eye before I start gouging at splinters in others' eyes.
When I read a passage like this, I almost always say something like: "Yeah, but what about the other guy?" This passage is telling slaves (in our context it can be applied to employees) to treat their masters (managers) with full respect so that God's name and the apostle's teaching would not be slandered. It's funny to me how often we apply other people's lives to God's Word when he wants me to apply my own life to it. If I get too close to being convicted about how I treat or respect those in authority over me I immediately start blaming the boss: "if he treated me better", "I thought he was supposed to be a Christian", etc. Rather than letting God's Word speak to me I start to defend and deflect.
This is probably what Jesus was talking about when he said not to pull splinters out of somebody's eye until you've gotten rid of the plank in your own. God, speak to me through your Word and help me to pull the planks out of my own eye before I start gouging at splinters in others' eyes.
Friday, February 23, 2007
Random Wine Use
1 Timothy 5:22-25
Paul is talking about ordaining elders and tells Timothy not to be hasty in that task but to do his homework: interview the candidate, interview the people who know the candidate (family, friends, co-workers) and make sure that they are worthy. The reason is that by laying hands on that person and giving authourity to that person, he (or she?) now acts on behalf of the church. Of course, we all act on behalf of Christ as his disciples and ambassadors and everything we do reflects on him and his body. However, by ordaining a person we are basically condoning them, holding them up as an example and authourity on behalf of the church.
Not only are we giving but we're taking on their identity - if they are crooked, we share in their sin and become identified with their sin. This gives the nominating committtee in our church a huge load to bear.
This was obviously an arduous task that caused Timothy stomach trouble (ok, maybe I'm over-reaching the passage) so Paul prescribed some wine for him. Maybe we should prescribe the same for our nominating committee... (Who picked 1 Timothy anyway?)
Paul is talking about ordaining elders and tells Timothy not to be hasty in that task but to do his homework: interview the candidate, interview the people who know the candidate (family, friends, co-workers) and make sure that they are worthy. The reason is that by laying hands on that person and giving authourity to that person, he (or she?) now acts on behalf of the church. Of course, we all act on behalf of Christ as his disciples and ambassadors and everything we do reflects on him and his body. However, by ordaining a person we are basically condoning them, holding them up as an example and authourity on behalf of the church.
Not only are we giving but we're taking on their identity - if they are crooked, we share in their sin and become identified with their sin. This gives the nominating committtee in our church a huge load to bear.
This was obviously an arduous task that caused Timothy stomach trouble (ok, maybe I'm over-reaching the passage) so Paul prescribed some wine for him. Maybe we should prescribe the same for our nominating committee... (Who picked 1 Timothy anyway?)
Un-muzzled oxen
This was done on Feb. 21 but I had no internet access.
1 Timothy 5:17-20
I am very humbled by the charge that Paul gives to Timothy regarding elders – especially those who preach and teach. First, I have no complaints about what I am being paid by the church. In fact, I want to make sure that the church is getting full value for their money. They have invested in me in incredible ways – both through salary and also by paying for learning opportunities. My job is to be a good steward of the church’s resources by making sure that I take full advantage of those opportunities. For me, this means that, if the church sends me to a conference, I attend fully and participate completely – that I try to learn as much as I possibly can for my own benefit and for the benefit of the church that sent me.
I also feel a huge responsibility to not abuse the second part of this teaching: to not entertain a charge against an elder unless it is brought by 2 or 3 witnesses. This means that the church has placed a lot of trust in me and I have a huge responsibility to live up to that trust. I haven’t always seen this practiced but for the most part this church is very good about protecting its elders, pastors and teachers.
The last part of this passage scares me to pieces. Because my reputation is so important to me (sometimes that’s a good thing in that it keeps me from doing things that are sinful; sometimes it’s a bad thing because it keeps me from taking risks) I would be very ashamed to have my sin brought before the whole church and to be rebuked publicly. However, this again speaks to the huge responsibility that I have to be faithful and righteous because of the position that this church has entrusted to me.
1 Timothy 5:17-20
I am very humbled by the charge that Paul gives to Timothy regarding elders – especially those who preach and teach. First, I have no complaints about what I am being paid by the church. In fact, I want to make sure that the church is getting full value for their money. They have invested in me in incredible ways – both through salary and also by paying for learning opportunities. My job is to be a good steward of the church’s resources by making sure that I take full advantage of those opportunities. For me, this means that, if the church sends me to a conference, I attend fully and participate completely – that I try to learn as much as I possibly can for my own benefit and for the benefit of the church that sent me.
I also feel a huge responsibility to not abuse the second part of this teaching: to not entertain a charge against an elder unless it is brought by 2 or 3 witnesses. This means that the church has placed a lot of trust in me and I have a huge responsibility to live up to that trust. I haven’t always seen this practiced but for the most part this church is very good about protecting its elders, pastors and teachers.
The last part of this passage scares me to pieces. Because my reputation is so important to me (sometimes that’s a good thing in that it keeps me from doing things that are sinful; sometimes it’s a bad thing because it keeps me from taking risks) I would be very ashamed to have my sin brought before the whole church and to be rebuked publicly. However, this again speaks to the huge responsibility that I have to be faithful and righteous because of the position that this church has entrusted to me.
Making the list
1 Timothy 5:1-21
First, did widows take some kind of pledge to be faithful to Christ alone after the death of their husband (sort of like being a nun)? Basically, Paul tells Timothy to not put young widows on a list of people needing support from the church because they will eventually get married (their sensual desires will overcome their dedication to Christ). It seems like widows had some sort of special status in the ancient church or ancient culture. Today, I don’t think we would base aid on age but on to what extent they needed it. I can think of several “widows” (made so by death of or abandonment by a husband) who need assistance. The church needs to do a better job of helping those people. I don’t think we should hire a pastor (or director if it is a woman – note the sarcasm!) of helping widows. I think that the church (the community of saints, the body of Christ, not the institution) should take on the responsibility of helping widows (isn't that part of the religion that God approves of - James 2). I think that it should be a function of small groups and of people. Maybe, in a church our size, we need to keep a list like Paul told Timothy to do but I am resistant to institutionalizing this.
Whatever the case, we (the church) need to be better at looking out for the marginalized in our church and our community because a) we need to learn from them. As we seek to be Jesus to them we will find them to become Jesus to us (see Matthew 25) and b) that is where Jesus would be and as his body or ambassadors we should have the same concerns, priorities and ministry as Jesus would if he were here in our community in this time.
In all of this, we must not play favourites. We must not minister to the attractive, the smart, the cool to the exclusion of the others. We must not minister to the others to the exclusion of the attractive, the smart and the cool. We must not minister just in Africa but also in Brocket.
First, did widows take some kind of pledge to be faithful to Christ alone after the death of their husband (sort of like being a nun)? Basically, Paul tells Timothy to not put young widows on a list of people needing support from the church because they will eventually get married (their sensual desires will overcome their dedication to Christ). It seems like widows had some sort of special status in the ancient church or ancient culture. Today, I don’t think we would base aid on age but on to what extent they needed it. I can think of several “widows” (made so by death of or abandonment by a husband) who need assistance. The church needs to do a better job of helping those people. I don’t think we should hire a pastor (or director if it is a woman – note the sarcasm!) of helping widows. I think that the church (the community of saints, the body of Christ, not the institution) should take on the responsibility of helping widows (isn't that part of the religion that God approves of - James 2). I think that it should be a function of small groups and of people. Maybe, in a church our size, we need to keep a list like Paul told Timothy to do but I am resistant to institutionalizing this.
Whatever the case, we (the church) need to be better at looking out for the marginalized in our church and our community because a) we need to learn from them. As we seek to be Jesus to them we will find them to become Jesus to us (see Matthew 25) and b) that is where Jesus would be and as his body or ambassadors we should have the same concerns, priorities and ministry as Jesus would if he were here in our community in this time.
In all of this, we must not play favourites. We must not minister to the attractive, the smart, the cool to the exclusion of the others. We must not minister to the others to the exclusion of the attractive, the smart and the cool. We must not minister just in Africa but also in Brocket.
Consumed
This was done Feb. 19 but I didn't have access to the internet
1 Timothy 4:15-16
Paul told Timothy to give himself wholly to setting an example for the believers, to reading Scripture publicly, to teaching and preaching and to using his gift. This was what was to consume Timothy’s life. As I look at the list, it seems pretty broad and overwhelming to me. I am the type of person that needs one thing to focus on. This, especially when I look at all the things that Timothy was supposed to set an example in, is a very long list of things. Far be it from me to disagree with Paul (there’s no sense in arguing with an inspired writer of Scripture) but I think I prefer Jesus’ priority: Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. All of these things that Paul tells Timothy to devote his life to fall into the category of the kingdom of God and His righteousness but I like the single minded focus of Jesus’ teaching. This gives me something to measure my life against: does this promote the kingdom of God or God’s righteousness in my life? I really want that to consume my life!
1 Timothy 4:15-16
Paul told Timothy to give himself wholly to setting an example for the believers, to reading Scripture publicly, to teaching and preaching and to using his gift. This was what was to consume Timothy’s life. As I look at the list, it seems pretty broad and overwhelming to me. I am the type of person that needs one thing to focus on. This, especially when I look at all the things that Timothy was supposed to set an example in, is a very long list of things. Far be it from me to disagree with Paul (there’s no sense in arguing with an inspired writer of Scripture) but I think I prefer Jesus’ priority: Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness. All of these things that Paul tells Timothy to devote his life to fall into the category of the kingdom of God and His righteousness but I like the single minded focus of Jesus’ teaching. This gives me something to measure my life against: does this promote the kingdom of God or God’s righteousness in my life? I really want that to consume my life!
Friday, February 16, 2007
Exemplary Examples
1 Timothy 4:9-14
Observation/Questions:
v. 10 - the living God is the Savior of all men, especially those who believe. I understand how God is the Savior of all those who believe but how is he then the Savior of all men? Is this what theologians mean when they talk about "common grace"?
v. 11 - what things exactly was Timothy supposed to command and teach on? Not to let people look down on him because he was young? I'm sure that would go over well: "I have a new command for you people: don't look down on me because I'm young!"
v. 12 - most young people (am I still young?) stop at this point: "don't look down on me because I am young". They miss the instructions to set an example in speech, life, love, faith and purity. This is such a tall order! But can you imagine what the Body of Christ would look like if its younger members took the principles of this command seriously! This is where I stand condemned: I am too worried about the joke to make sure that I am exemplary in my speech. I don't really take seriously the commmand to avoid coarse joking and foolish talk. I think there are too realities: 1) I don't want to be seen as holier than everyone else. This is sad because I am more concerned with people's perceptions than with Christ's. 2) (this is related to 1) It is a risk to start a serious conversation about spiritual matters. Most people, even Christians, get pretty uncomfortable. This is sad, too. Our spiritual journey is supposed to be the priority for our lives and we won't talk about it! My prayer is that Christ would give me the humility to be a proper example to other believers (both older and younger than me) in these areas.
v. 14 - I think the church needs to get back to this. Rather than individuals taking spiritual gift tests and surveys and going to a guidance counsellor for aptitude testing, the church (the community of saints, not the institution) needs to get back in the business of comissioning its young people for the work that the community has determined that God has gifted them for. I see this over and over in Scripture: the church prays and sets people apart for ministry, the community confirms the gifting and calling of the individual. Let's get back to this!
Observation/Questions:
v. 10 - the living God is the Savior of all men, especially those who believe. I understand how God is the Savior of all those who believe but how is he then the Savior of all men? Is this what theologians mean when they talk about "common grace"?
v. 11 - what things exactly was Timothy supposed to command and teach on? Not to let people look down on him because he was young? I'm sure that would go over well: "I have a new command for you people: don't look down on me because I'm young!"
v. 12 - most young people (am I still young?) stop at this point: "don't look down on me because I am young". They miss the instructions to set an example in speech, life, love, faith and purity. This is such a tall order! But can you imagine what the Body of Christ would look like if its younger members took the principles of this command seriously! This is where I stand condemned: I am too worried about the joke to make sure that I am exemplary in my speech. I don't really take seriously the commmand to avoid coarse joking and foolish talk. I think there are too realities: 1) I don't want to be seen as holier than everyone else. This is sad because I am more concerned with people's perceptions than with Christ's. 2) (this is related to 1) It is a risk to start a serious conversation about spiritual matters. Most people, even Christians, get pretty uncomfortable. This is sad, too. Our spiritual journey is supposed to be the priority for our lives and we won't talk about it! My prayer is that Christ would give me the humility to be a proper example to other believers (both older and younger than me) in these areas.
v. 14 - I think the church needs to get back to this. Rather than individuals taking spiritual gift tests and surveys and going to a guidance counsellor for aptitude testing, the church (the community of saints, not the institution) needs to get back in the business of comissioning its young people for the work that the community has determined that God has gifted them for. I see this over and over in Scripture: the church prays and sets people apart for ministry, the community confirms the gifting and calling of the individual. Let's get back to this!
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Cross Training
1 Timothy 4:6-8
According to the NIV text notes, the word "godly" or "godliness" is only used by Paul in the pastoral epistles. It is used 8 times in 1 Timothy alone. To be godly means to be like God and, according to Paul, it takes training to achieve. This means that, while God himself is the source of the godly life (or, in the teaching of Jesus, to produce godly fruit, I need to be connected to the godly life, which is Jesus), I still have a responsibility in myself to work toward becoming more like God in the way I think, act, and believe.
In fact, Paul says that I should spend more time training myself to be godly than I do training myself to be in shape (which shouldn't be that hard for me considering the amount of time I spend training my body!) because physical training only has benefits for the present life while godliness training has benefits for the present life and the life to come.
That's pretty big! I think the implications are that we won't all enter heaven at the same spot spiritually - that those who have worked harder to enjoy and know God here on earth will somehow be further ahead in there relationship with and enjoyment of God in heaven. This isn't how I've typically thought but Paul indicates that there are benefits in the life to come for those who train hard in godliness in the present life and I can think of no greater benefit than to be in close intimacy with the Father.
According to the NIV text notes, the word "godly" or "godliness" is only used by Paul in the pastoral epistles. It is used 8 times in 1 Timothy alone. To be godly means to be like God and, according to Paul, it takes training to achieve. This means that, while God himself is the source of the godly life (or, in the teaching of Jesus, to produce godly fruit, I need to be connected to the godly life, which is Jesus), I still have a responsibility in myself to work toward becoming more like God in the way I think, act, and believe.
In fact, Paul says that I should spend more time training myself to be godly than I do training myself to be in shape (which shouldn't be that hard for me considering the amount of time I spend training my body!) because physical training only has benefits for the present life while godliness training has benefits for the present life and the life to come.
That's pretty big! I think the implications are that we won't all enter heaven at the same spot spiritually - that those who have worked harder to enjoy and know God here on earth will somehow be further ahead in there relationship with and enjoyment of God in heaven. This isn't how I've typically thought but Paul indicates that there are benefits in the life to come for those who train hard in godliness in the present life and I can think of no greater benefit than to be in close intimacy with the Father.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Oooo! That's hot!
1 Timothy 4
Paul indicates that one of the reasons for the false teaching is that the false teachers have had their consciences seared as with a hot iron. Ouch! I wonder how many of us think we are living with a "clean conscience" but the reality is that the reason our consciences don't "prick" us any more is that we've seared off all the nerve endings and we know longer feel guilt, sorrow or a sense that this is wrong.
How did we get here? Did we ignore our conscience for so long that we've just gotten used to it's warnings and message? How do we get back to having a conscience that is alive to the promptings of truth and the Holy Spirit? I know that I can't let my conscience be my guide! I think it is by opening ourselves up to the Word of God and to the surgery of the Holy Spirit. I'm guessing the scraping away of dead conscience nerves isn't going to be pleasant but if I want to be alive to God and soft to his guiding, then I know that it is necessary.
God, prepare me to face the pain to bring life back to this dead area!
Paul indicates that one of the reasons for the false teaching is that the false teachers have had their consciences seared as with a hot iron. Ouch! I wonder how many of us think we are living with a "clean conscience" but the reality is that the reason our consciences don't "prick" us any more is that we've seared off all the nerve endings and we know longer feel guilt, sorrow or a sense that this is wrong.
How did we get here? Did we ignore our conscience for so long that we've just gotten used to it's warnings and message? How do we get back to having a conscience that is alive to the promptings of truth and the Holy Spirit? I know that I can't let my conscience be my guide! I think it is by opening ourselves up to the Word of God and to the surgery of the Holy Spirit. I'm guessing the scraping away of dead conscience nerves isn't going to be pleasant but if I want to be alive to God and soft to his guiding, then I know that it is necessary.
God, prepare me to face the pain to bring life back to this dead area!
Friday, February 9, 2007
The secret of piety
1 Timothy 3
What I observe:
The deacons had to pass some kind of test before they could become deacons (v. 10). Judging from v. 9, it would seem that the test probably checked on their knowledge of the deep truths of the faith and that they were living with a clean conscience.
Paul's purpose for this letter was to be an instruction manual on church conduct when the church is in crisis or chaos (v. 14-15). I know I'm reading into it a little bit but it is obvious from chapter 1 that this is a church in crisis.
The church plays a very important role - it is the pillar and foundation of truth (v. 15). I think this means that the community of disciples plays a large role in determining truth. I know that truth is ultimately found in the Scriptures but the community plays an important role in the interpretation of those Scriptures.
What I learn:
After all the instructions about deacons and elders, Paul gets down to the secret of the pious or godly life: Jesus and his incarnation. This reminds me that everything I believe is based on a person, not a creed. It all comes down to Jesus - he is the secret and the mystery. I love that Paul bursts into song here - almost as if the secret has to come bursting out of him. The point of conducting ourselves well in the household of God, the church of the living God and the pillar and foundation of the truth is the glory of Jesus. Conversely, and mysteriously, it is Jesus that allows us to conduct ourselves well.
What I observe:
The deacons had to pass some kind of test before they could become deacons (v. 10). Judging from v. 9, it would seem that the test probably checked on their knowledge of the deep truths of the faith and that they were living with a clean conscience.
Paul's purpose for this letter was to be an instruction manual on church conduct when the church is in crisis or chaos (v. 14-15). I know I'm reading into it a little bit but it is obvious from chapter 1 that this is a church in crisis.
The church plays a very important role - it is the pillar and foundation of truth (v. 15). I think this means that the community of disciples plays a large role in determining truth. I know that truth is ultimately found in the Scriptures but the community plays an important role in the interpretation of those Scriptures.
What I learn:
After all the instructions about deacons and elders, Paul gets down to the secret of the pious or godly life: Jesus and his incarnation. This reminds me that everything I believe is based on a person, not a creed. It all comes down to Jesus - he is the secret and the mystery. I love that Paul bursts into song here - almost as if the secret has to come bursting out of him. The point of conducting ourselves well in the household of God, the church of the living God and the pillar and foundation of the truth is the glory of Jesus. Conversely, and mysteriously, it is Jesus that allows us to conduct ourselves well.
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Pick-a-phrase...
1 Timothy 3
So, I actually have some more frustrations with how this passage is generally applied in our church. We say that 1 Timothy 3 contains the qualifications for an elder and a deacon but we don't apply all the qualifications equally. We insist on certain ones but overlook others (are all our elders hospitable? are all our elders able to teach? do all their children obey them with proper respect? do all of them have wives that are not gossips or malicious talkers?).
My goal is to look for Jesus in each section of Scripture that I read. I confess that he is difficult to find in this passage. I think the principle of the passage is that there should be order and decency in the church which would reflect that there was a sense of decency and possibly calmness about Jesus - he was not given to chaos (although the driving out the money changers would have been a bit frightening!).
So, I actually have some more frustrations with how this passage is generally applied in our church. We say that 1 Timothy 3 contains the qualifications for an elder and a deacon but we don't apply all the qualifications equally. We insist on certain ones but overlook others (are all our elders hospitable? are all our elders able to teach? do all their children obey them with proper respect? do all of them have wives that are not gossips or malicious talkers?).
My goal is to look for Jesus in each section of Scripture that I read. I confess that he is difficult to find in this passage. I think the principle of the passage is that there should be order and decency in the church which would reflect that there was a sense of decency and possibly calmness about Jesus - he was not given to chaos (although the driving out the money changers would have been a bit frightening!).
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Gentleman's Club?
1 Timothy 3
I think that we're a little bit inconsistent. We take the phrase "husband of one wife" in 3:2 (overseers or bishops or, in our case, elders) literally but not in 3:12 (deacons) because in Romans 16:1 we find a female deaconess (who couldn't be the husband of but one wife unless the church was in favour of same sex marriage...).
The argument I've heard goes like this: a woman cannot be an elder (overseer, bishop) because the phrase "the husband of but one wife" indicates that this role can only be filled by a man. But a woman can be a deacon(ess) because we find an example of one in the Bible even though Paul uses the exact same phrase in regards to deacons just 10 verses later.
Doesn't this indicate further that Ephesus was a special case because it was a sick church that needed special rules in order for it to become healthy again?
I think that we're a little bit inconsistent. We take the phrase "husband of one wife" in 3:2 (overseers or bishops or, in our case, elders) literally but not in 3:12 (deacons) because in Romans 16:1 we find a female deaconess (who couldn't be the husband of but one wife unless the church was in favour of same sex marriage...).
The argument I've heard goes like this: a woman cannot be an elder (overseer, bishop) because the phrase "the husband of but one wife" indicates that this role can only be filled by a man. But a woman can be a deacon(ess) because we find an example of one in the Bible even though Paul uses the exact same phrase in regards to deacons just 10 verses later.
Doesn't this indicate further that Ephesus was a special case because it was a sick church that needed special rules in order for it to become healthy again?
Friday, February 2, 2007
Ding-ding... Let's get ready to rumble!
1 Timothy 2
Ok, so I've got a lot of this chapter to cover today since I wasn't so great at posting this week and will be away for the weekend so this will likely be my last post on this chapter.
First, I am becoming increasingly concerned for the salvation of my students and the students in Lethbridge. I don't want death to claim one more who is still a citizen/captive of the kingdom of darkness. I'm not sure what to do about it at this time (and believe that we are moving in some great directions with our Ignite Camps) but I get great comfort and confidence from the fact that God's desire (will?) is that everyone would be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. I believe that as I continue before God in prayer that he will reveal to me what I need to do in the areas of evangelism.
Ok, let's get to the main event... Paul stirs up some controversy here. Let me start with the questions. When Paul says he wants men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer is that just men or does he mean humans (in the sense of "mankind")? Does the desire for women to dress modestly only apply to women? Or does the principle extend to men as well? (I've seen some guys wear clothing that would be immodest). Does Paul's instruction about the role of women apply to all women in all cultures for all time? Or were there special circumstances in Ephesus that caused Paul to issue such a command? If we are going to teach that women should not teach for all time and all cultures, doesn't that mean that we should teach that women should be saved through childbearing? What does this mean for my wife?
After some study, hearing different positions at BBC and reading some books (Community 101 being an influential one for me) I believe that there were special circumstances that caused Paul to issue this order to the church in Ephesus. Chapter 1 makes it clear that heresies were being taught and the general sense of the letter is that there was a lot of chaos and confusion in the church (which is the reason Timothy was sent as a relatively permanent apostolic representative - a rare occurrence judging from the rest of Scripture).
My problem with my position is that the preceding verses are applicable universally. However, my problem with the other position is that nowhere does it mention that the gifts of leadership, pastor/teacher, shepherd, etc. were only given to men. Besides that, Scripture makes it clear that when it comes to how God sees us after salvation, he doesn't see male or female, slave or free, Jew or Gentile. The titles and roles that go along with them seem to be human inventions.
Ok, let's tackle the last verse. The word "saved" is used in three ways through Scripture:
1) deliverance from disease or demon possession
Not likely the meaning here unless one considers the child in her a disease or demon!
2) the rescue of physical life from impending peril or instant death
Basically this means that God will protect (Christian?) women so they won't die while giving birth to children. The test of history shows that this is not likely the meaning. Plenty of Christian women have died in childbirth.
3) spiritual salvation
We know that salvation is by grace alone. A woman is not made spiritually alive by giving birth. This would also mean that all barren women would miss out on salvation somehow. The NIV study Bible says that it could mean that women are saved spiritually through the physical birth of Jesus. But aren't we saved through his death and resurrection? Wouldn't men be included in that salvation? Besides, the tense is future: they will be saved. Wouldn't the more proper reading be: "Women have been saved through childbearing..." Even that sounds awkward! This view would solve the evangelism problem I mentioned earlier - "hey girls! Want to go to heaven? Have babies!!"
Ok, so I've got a lot of this chapter to cover today since I wasn't so great at posting this week and will be away for the weekend so this will likely be my last post on this chapter.
First, I am becoming increasingly concerned for the salvation of my students and the students in Lethbridge. I don't want death to claim one more who is still a citizen/captive of the kingdom of darkness. I'm not sure what to do about it at this time (and believe that we are moving in some great directions with our Ignite Camps) but I get great comfort and confidence from the fact that God's desire (will?) is that everyone would be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. I believe that as I continue before God in prayer that he will reveal to me what I need to do in the areas of evangelism.
Ok, let's get to the main event... Paul stirs up some controversy here. Let me start with the questions. When Paul says he wants men everywhere to lift up holy hands in prayer is that just men or does he mean humans (in the sense of "mankind")? Does the desire for women to dress modestly only apply to women? Or does the principle extend to men as well? (I've seen some guys wear clothing that would be immodest). Does Paul's instruction about the role of women apply to all women in all cultures for all time? Or were there special circumstances in Ephesus that caused Paul to issue such a command? If we are going to teach that women should not teach for all time and all cultures, doesn't that mean that we should teach that women should be saved through childbearing? What does this mean for my wife?
After some study, hearing different positions at BBC and reading some books (Community 101 being an influential one for me) I believe that there were special circumstances that caused Paul to issue this order to the church in Ephesus. Chapter 1 makes it clear that heresies were being taught and the general sense of the letter is that there was a lot of chaos and confusion in the church (which is the reason Timothy was sent as a relatively permanent apostolic representative - a rare occurrence judging from the rest of Scripture).
My problem with my position is that the preceding verses are applicable universally. However, my problem with the other position is that nowhere does it mention that the gifts of leadership, pastor/teacher, shepherd, etc. were only given to men. Besides that, Scripture makes it clear that when it comes to how God sees us after salvation, he doesn't see male or female, slave or free, Jew or Gentile. The titles and roles that go along with them seem to be human inventions.
Ok, let's tackle the last verse. The word "saved" is used in three ways through Scripture:
1) deliverance from disease or demon possession
Not likely the meaning here unless one considers the child in her a disease or demon!
2) the rescue of physical life from impending peril or instant death
Basically this means that God will protect (Christian?) women so they won't die while giving birth to children. The test of history shows that this is not likely the meaning. Plenty of Christian women have died in childbirth.
3) spiritual salvation
We know that salvation is by grace alone. A woman is not made spiritually alive by giving birth. This would also mean that all barren women would miss out on salvation somehow. The NIV study Bible says that it could mean that women are saved spiritually through the physical birth of Jesus. But aren't we saved through his death and resurrection? Wouldn't men be included in that salvation? Besides, the tense is future: they will be saved. Wouldn't the more proper reading be: "Women have been saved through childbearing..." Even that sounds awkward! This view would solve the evangelism problem I mentioned earlier - "hey girls! Want to go to heaven? Have babies!!"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
