Unfortunately, many Christians see doubt as something synonymous with unbelief – as though doubt and belief cannot exist at the same time.  This viewpoint is based largely on a misunderstanding of what the apostle James says: “you must believe and not doubt, because the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do” (James 1:6–8).
  
While James’ statement might seem at first sight to be against any kind of doubt, if we look at the context of what he says we realize that the apostle is talking about a specific kind of doubt that we must shun.   There are two possibilities. First, notice that James uses the expression “double minded” of the doubter, and he uses it again in the fourth chapter of his letter: “Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded” (James 4:7).  The context of this second use of the expression is clear: “Do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore, whoever chooses to be a friend of the world renders himself an enemy of God” (James 4:4).

So the first possibility is that in condemning doubting in 1:6-8, James is referring to the kind of double-mindedness that a person has who is not truly given over to God  – a person who has “one foot” in his religion, but the other foot solidly planted in the world. If James is using the expression “double-minded” with the same meanings in chapter 1 and 4, then he is telling us that a “friend of the world” who is torn between two loyalties cannot expect God to answer his or her prayers.  Alternately, if James is using “double-minded” in a different and more limited sense in chapter 1 – meaning someone who does not know for sure if God will answer his or her prayers – then the outcome is the same: they will not be answered. 

But these are the only two meanings of doubting and double mindedness that can possibly be found in what James says in 1:6–8.  Contextually, there is simply no way that this passage can be somehow expanded to mean doubts of any kind – such as intellectual doubts about the meaning of a given scripture, or as to what is God’s will in  a certain situation.  These kinds of doubts or uncertainties need not be seen as being somehow unchristian, and they are certainly not equivalent of disbelief.

In his excellent book In Two Minds, first published in 1976, author and social critic Os Guinness clearly explains the difference between doubt and unbelief:

"Doubt is not the opposite of faith, nor is it the same as unbelief. Doubt is a state of mind in suspension between faith and unbelief so that it is neither of them wholly and it is each only partly. This distinction is absolutely vital because it uncovers and deals with the first major misconception of doubt – the idea that in doubting a believer is betraying faith and surrendering to unbelief" (In Two Minds, page 27).

Guinness points out that failure to understand the true nature of this kind of intellectual doubt often causes great anxiety to many who experience such uncertainties, yet who are sincerely committed to God.  He continues to illustrate this fact in the following way:

"The word unbelief is usually used of a willful refusal to believe or a deliberate decision to disobey. So, while doubt is a state of suspension between faith and unbelief, unbelief is a state of mind which is closed against God, an attitude of heart which disobeys God as much as it disbelieves the truth ... Doubt is not the opposite of faith, unbelief is" (pages 27,30).

We should not see doubts that are occasional or limited to small or specific areas of uncertainty as being somehow spiritually wrong, therefore.  We should always address our doubts and resolve them quickly if possible, but just like temptations they are not in themselves sin – only when a temptation or doubt is acted upon does it become sinful (Romans 14:23; etc.).  

We should always remember that Jesus accepted and helped the man whom he had told “All things are possible for one who believes” and who sincerely prayed “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!” (Mark 9:23–24). This is in itself clear proof that James does not mean that a person with any kind of doubts cannot have answered prayer.  Jesus also continued to accept and work with his disciple Thomas to move him through his doubts (John 20:24–29).  

Doubts that are not based on the kind of double-mindedness that is not truly committed to God or simply cannot accept that God can or will help us are neither unbelief nor do they preclude God working with us. Such doubts are, in fact, often normal temporary uncertainties that are met and, with God’s help, eventually dispelled in the normal lifetime path of faith.

The English expression “above all” is a superlative: there can normally only be one thing that is “above all” in any given category – such as the highest mountain or the largest ocean.  In the New Testament, several Greek phrases function in the same way – they also connote something that is more important than any other among the things being discussed.  For example, the apostle James tells us “Above all, my brothers and sisters, do not swear” (James 5:12) – meaning that is the most important thing his readers must keep in mind in the context he is speaking about.

The apostle Peter uses the expression in the same way in his epistles, but interestingly he uses it not once but three times – each time of a different thing:

“Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins” (1 Peter 4:8).

“Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things” (2 Peter 1:20).

“Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires” (2 Peter 3:3).

At first sight these statements seem to be unrelated. They certainly speak of different things that the apostle urges us to keep foremost in mind – though it may seem strange that he mentions two things to keep in  mind “above all” in the same epistle.  Yet there is perhaps a thread that connects them all.

In the first of these verses, Peter’s subject is obvious – it is love of one another that he emphasizes must be paramount in our concerns.  We must not only love each other, he says, but we must love each other deeply.  

In the second verse the subject may seem a somewhat narrow one to be regarded as something “above all else,” but the context of the statement helps us to understand what the verse is emphasizing.  Peter is not simply talking about understanding Scripture, but about our perception of it in a context of faith. The epistle’s first verses tell us that Peter writes: “To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours” (2 Peter 1:1). 

A few verses later Peter expands the theme of faith: “make every effort to add to your faith goodness” (2 Peter 1:5).  Then in verse 16 Peter begins a defense of his readers’ faith: “For we did not follow cleverly devised stories” (2 Peter 1:16);  in verse 19 he adds “We also have the prophetic message” (2 Peter 1:19)  It is in continuation of this thought that he then writes “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20).  Peter’s point is that our faith is well grounded – something he urges us to place at the forefront of our minds.

In the final verse in which he uses the expression “above all” the apostle tells us “Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come” (2 Peter 3:3) and once again we must look at its context.  The third chapter of 2 Peter develops the idea that scoffers will come who, if they are able,  will undermine the very hope of every believer in the return of our Lord: “They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised?” (2 Peter 3:4), and Peter immediately follows this warning with a defense of the Christian hope regarding Christ’s return (verses 5–12) – concluding with the words “But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells. So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this” (verses 13–14 , emphases added).  Twice Peter stresses that which the believer is looking forward to – hoping for.  The context of 2 Peter 3:3 is clearly that it is paramount that we are not affected by scoffers and that we can continue to hope in the reality of the Lord’s return.

Whether consciously or not, Peter’s three references to things that we must keep in mind “above all” are related in that they have to do with the great triad of love, faith, and hope* (or “faith, hope, and love” as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:13), that make up the centrality of Christian life.  There is no contradiction in what Peter writes – these three qualities are, indeed, things that we must strive toward “above all.”
 
* Download our free e-book These Three Remain: Why Faith, Hope and Love Are Even More Important Than You Realize  here.

“Jesus said, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place'” (John 18:36).

The difficulty of this verse is that it appears to contradict other scriptures of the New Testament that show the kingdom of God to be something that would be established in this world. Adding to the apparent confusion, Jesus said in the second half of John 18:36 that his kingdom was not “in,” but “from” another place.

The answer to the seeming difficulty is that both aspects of the kingdom of God are true. On the one hand, the kingdom of God is certainly in heaven. This seems obvious in the expression “the kingdom of heaven,” though that is actually not a proof.  Matthew, writing to a predominantly Jewish audience, used “kingdom of heaven” because many Jews used that expression in order to avoid unnecessary use of the name of God – just as in English people sometimes say “Good heavens,” which is just an indirect way of using God’s name. All the other Gospel writers use “kingdom of God.” But apart from this detail it is obvious that God rules as King in heaven and in that sense, the “kingdom of God” is the “kingdom of heaven” (see Matthew 5:34; Daniel 4:37; etc.).

On the other hand, a great many scriptures  clearly show the kingdom of heaven will be established on earth – something Christ said we should pray for (Matthew 6:10) and a truth at the core of his teaching, as we see in the Gospels: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near” (Matthew 3:2). The situation is not unlike that of earlier centuries when the colonial powers were located in their own countries, but took over distant lands. It was equally true to say that the “kingdom of France” and the “kingdom of England” were in their respective areas, but also that these kingdoms were “coming near” the areas they annexed, and that the rule of those kingdoms was finally established in the new lands.

With this background and a little extra information, we can now understand the meaning of Jesus’ words in John 18.36.   The Greek word used in John (basileia) and translated “kingdom” can mean not only the physical actual kingdom, but also the “rule” or “authority” of the king. In that sense, it is like the colonial analogy we used. French Canada, called “New France,” was not France, but part of the kingdom of France in the sense it was under the rule of the king of France.  Sometimes people say that Christ did not speak Greek, but rather would have said these words in Aramaic or possibly Hebrew.  Even if that is true, the Aramaic (malkuta) and Hebrew (malkuth) words have exactly the same double meaning.
​
So, the words “My kingdom is not of this world”  spoken by Jesus can just as properly be translated “My authority is not of this world … my authority is from another place.” Jesus’ words do not refer then to being the ruler of the kingdom in heaven, but to his having authority from the kingdom in heaven.

When we understand the double meaning of “kingdom,” we can see how John 18:36 does not contradict the many scriptures regarding the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth, but simply refers to the origin of Christ’s authority as that kingdom’s King.​

“Why, LORD, do you make us wander from your ways and harden our hearts so we do not revere you?” (Isaiah 63:17).
 
This is sometimes said to be one of the most difficult verses to understand in the Bible.  All the major translations essentially agree on how the verse should be worded, so the problem is not one of understanding what the underlying Hebrew text says, but simply what it means.  On the surface, the prophet Isaiah seems to blame God for ancient Israel’s sins, and to claim that it is because of God’s action in some way that we do not properly fear him.

Because the plain meaning of the words seems to contradict the rest of what the Bible teaches – that humans are entirely responsible for their own sins – some commentators have claimed that the passage must be understood as being spoken by those antagonistic to God who simply want to blame him for their wrongdoings.  But the context shows this explanation is impossible.  The section begins, in verse 7, with the words “I will tell of the kindnesses of the Lord, the deeds for which he is to be praised, according to all the Lord has done for us” and continues in this kind of positive and devout manner till the speaker says “you, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name” (vs. 16) immediately before asking “Why, Lord, do you make us wander from your ways and harden our hearts …” (vs. 17). So, there is no sign of antagonism toward God at all – simply the asking of a question we would not expect Isaiah to ask.

The best way to understand this scripture is probably as referring to the fact that the people of Israel’s desire to do right – no matter how weak the desire may have been – was rendered useless by God’s continued displeasure with them, and the resulting lack of his help that they desperately needed if they were to do what was right (see vs. 10). As such, the statement is a strong affirmation of Israel’s own sinfulness and need of God rather than an accusation of God’s action in “making” them sin.  

This meaning of Isaiah’s words can be seen to be likely because the question is immediately followed by the request “Return for the sake of your servants” (vs. 18) – a request for God’s help as in times past (vs. 9).  So we might paraphrase Isaiah’s seemingly strange question as “Will you not help us again so that we are not left to our own wandering and hardness of heart?”

Certainly, there is nothing to be found anywhere else in the book of Isaiah that would suggest this is not the meaning of Isaiah 63:17.  In fact, the situation is clearly summarized in Isaiah’s very next chapter where the prophet speaks on behalf of Israel, saying: “You come to the help of those who gladly do right, who remember your ways. But when we continued to sin against them, you were angry. How then can we be saved? … for you have hidden your face from us and have given us over to our sins” (Isaiah 64:5–7).
​
Rather than an accusation that God was causing Israel to sin, Isaiah’s message is clearly that sinful Israel needed God’s help to do right – a lesson we can also learn from this powerful biblical book, and one we should never forget.

“The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the LORD has made them both” (Proverbs 20:12).
 
We talk about “hearing the word of God,” but it is interesting that the Bible frequently talks about both hearing and seeing God’s revelation.  We see this, for example, in the book of Numbers when it speaks of “him who hears the words of God, Who sees the vision of the Almighty” (Numbers 24:4), or in Jeremiah: “For who among them has stood in the council of the Lord to see and to hear his word” (Jeremiah 23:18).  This duality of  seeing and hearing God’s word has a specific application to us as Christians.

The first disciples of Jesus had the opportunity, of course, to see and to hear him – to see his actions and hear his words directly. As the apostle John wrote: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched – this we proclaim concerning the Word of life … We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard” (1 John 1:1, 3).

The original disciples experienced the word of God directly from “the Word” himself and sometimes it may seem to us that it must have been easier for those first Christians to experience and understand the word of God than it is for us now.  But we should remember that just hearing the words and seeing them in action is no guarantee of truly seeing and hearing them at a level of actual understanding – even if we had lived at that time.  As Jesus himself said of the majority who heard his public teaching: “This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand” (Matthew 13:13; ESV).

In saying this Jesus was paraphrasing God’s words found in the book of Isaiah: “Go, and say to this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive’ … lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts …” (Isaiah 6:9-10 ESV, and see Deuteronomy 29:4; etc.).

These words show symbolically that our minds must be “opened” – made receptive – by God in order for us to hear and see the full significance of spiritual things. The New Testament makes this clear also in what the apostle Paul tells us: “The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit” (1 Corinthians 2:14 NIV).  Jesus referred to this when he said “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me” (John 6:45)        
  
But this does not mean that the Christian somehow understands spiritual things without going through the normal process of seeing and hearing.  What Ananias told Paul applies to all Christians to some degree:  “‘The God of our ancestors has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. You will be his witness to all people of what you have seen and heard” (Acts 22:14–15).

We are called to “see and hear” – to receive the information we are then helped to understand.   So how do we see and hear the word of God today?  “Hearing” the word of God is obviously accomplished through reading – or hearing someone else who is reading out – the words of the Bible. But how do we “see” the word today?

The answer is simple enough, yet we often do not think about it or utilize it in the way we could.  We “see” the word of God today when we fellowship with those in whom the word lives today.   The apostle John referred to this very fact when he wrote: “what we have seen and heard we also declare to you, so that you may also have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ”  (1 John 1:3 CSB).   Paul makes the connection even more clearly: “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1) and “What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you” (Philippians 4:9). And in the Epistle to the Hebrews we read “Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith” (Hebrews 13:7).

Inasmuch as others follow God, we can learn from them by seeing the Word alive in their lives.  We must also hear the written word in order to know when others are imitating Christ, but the combined hearing and seeing guides us in growing more like Christ ourselves.  This is how we all have opportunity to hear and see the word and the Word of God – even those who are not blessed with physical sight or hearing in this life can see and hear the Lord in this way.

The Bible makes the dual power of speech – to hurt and to help – clear when it tells us that “Death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21 ESV).  Jesus himself linked discipleship and speech together (Matthew 5:22-23 etc.) and he left no doubt about the seriousness of this subject when he said “I tell you this, you must give an account on judgment day for every idle word you speak. The words you say will either acquit you or condemn you” (Matthew 12:36–37 NLT).  We will be judged, Christ says, as much by what we say as what we do. 

But although it can be destructive, the power of speech may be used for great good and The Power of Speech: The Potent Force that Every Christian Is Called to Use Daily shows how you can stop harming yourself and others through what you say and start using the power of speech for good  – as every Christian should.

You can download this new free e-book directly without any kind of registration from our sister-site FreeChristianEBooks.org here.

It is interesting that  one of the four Gospels focuses on faith far more than the others. That Gospel is the Gospel of John.  Actually, John does not use the noun “faith” at all – it occurs nowhere in his Gospel. Instead, John always uses the verb “believe” (Greek pisteuo), and he uses that word about 100 times (perhaps surprisingly, given most people’s perception of John, that is over twice as many times as he uses forms of the word agape or “love”!).  To put John’s use of “believe” in perspective, we should realize that this is more than the use of the word in all the other Gospels combined. In fact, John’s Gospel contains well over half of all the instances of pisteuo or “believe” in the whole New Testament.  Clearly, then, “believe” is a key word in understanding John’s Gospel, and we can learn a great deal about the nature of belief and believing by focusing on what the apostle tells us in his account.  Three points stand out, and John repeatedly shows our faith must be based upon these three aspects of believing. 
 
The Person of Christ
It is not coincidental that the great summary of God’s purpose set out in John 3:16 revolves around belief: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16, emphases added here and below).  What we miss, reading this so-often-quoted verse out of context – as is so often done – is John’s continued stress on believing: “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son” (John 3:18).  Four times in the space of these two verses John hammers home the point that it is only as we believe in the person of Jesus Christ as the Son of God that faith will be rewarded with eternal life.  

Throughout his Gospel, John gives many examples of what and why we must believe (2:11; 4:41; 8:24; 10:38; 16:30; etc.), and they are all based upon the person of Jesus Christ, his nature, character, and the work that he accomplished. There is no room in John’s Gospel for any abstract “all you need is love” message.  John’s Gospel is deeply rooted in the necessity of active believing faith in Christ as much as it is in showing the importance of love.
Indeed, the very purpose for the Gospel of John, as the apostle himself tells us near its conclusion,  is so that we “ … may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:30-31). 

The Work of Belief

We know, as the apostle Paul clearly affirms, that “the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23), but John’s Gospel paints a complementary picture emphasizing that although God does give eternal life freely, the gift comes with responsibilities.  While Matthew’s Gospel shows Jesus asserting: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21), John’s Gospel records Jesus instructing his disciples in the work that relates to faith: “Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you …  Then they asked him, ‘What must we do to do the works God requires?’  Jesus answered, ‘The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:27-29).

Although it is easy to presume that Jesus is talking about simply accepting or holding a belief here, John’s wording shows that in reality he is stressing the active believing that is itself something that we do, rather than just accept.  For John, our belief is not a thing that we possess, but an action that we do on a recurring basis – as we see in the way he repeatedly tells us that the disciples believed as they witnessed Christ’s miracles and teachings (John 2:11; 16:30; 20:8; etc.). This leads us to John’s final emphasis regarding the nature of true believing. 

Ongoing Perseverance

Precisely because true believing involves repeated action on our part, John also stresses that believing must be coupled with perseverance.  The apostle gives clear instances of individuals who had believed, but who stopped believing. In John 8, for example, we read: “Even as he spoke, many believed in him. So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed Him, ‘If you continue in My word, you really are My disciples’” (John 8:30-31).
The importance of ongoing and continuing faith was already stressed by John two chapters earlier when he reveals that previously believing individuals “… turned back and no longer followed him” (John 6:66).  This scripture alone shows that believing faith is not something entered into on a one-time basis, but an ongoing action that must be maintained through perseverance.

When John tells us, near the close of his Gospel, that “these [things] are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31, emphasis added), the word “believe” is literally “be believing” –  ongoing believing –  and this conceptual conclusion of the Gospel echoes its opening  concept that “In him was life” (John1:4).
​
John’s Gospel clearly shows us that true believing is based on the person of Christ, involves active expression on our part, and must be maintained through perseverance.  The apostle makes it clear that lack of these three factors led to many not believing or losing the belief they once exercised.  It is in these three ways, however, that John shows we do truly believe, and through that believing we have life.

“There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all”  (Ephesians 4:4–6).
 
One of the key teachings of Paul’s epistle to the Ephesians is that of unity. The apostle emphasizes, among other things, that there is “one faith,” and “one baptism” (Ephesians 4: 5).  Ironically, however, this particular section of Paul’s writings is sometimes misunderstood in a way that limits Christian unity and interaction. The apostle’s words are misconstrued as a call to doctrinal purity and to mean there is only one faith (“ours” and not “theirs”)  and one baptism (the way we do it, not how others perform the rite).

Doctrinal purity is important, of course; but it is hard to find a scripture to show that minor matters of doctrine trump the unity that God desires within his church.  Many attempt to find such scriptures, however, and often settle on Romans 16:17:  “I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.”  This verse is often used to attempt to show that even minor matters of doctrine are more important than unity, but that is really the exact opposite of its meaning. Paul is actually urging us to see that the divisions and offenses caused by some are contrary to doctrine – it is people who divide the church who are to be avoided, not those who may differ in understanding of minor points.

Some feel that every detail of doctrine as they understand it is important and cannot be negotiated, but Paul makes a clear distinction between the essentials of the gospel that cannot and must not be compromised (Galatians 1:8) and minor issues of understanding  (Philippians 3:15) that do not necessarily separate individuals from the body of Christ. 

But to return to Ephesians. To understand why Paul speaks of “one faith” and “one baptism,” it is vital that we keep in mind the context of what Paul is saying. Throughout Chapter 4, and throughout the whole epistle, Paul stresses the need for unity in the church and, not surprisingly, Ephesians has frequently been called the “epistle of unity.” 

Paul begins Ephesians by pointing to the great goal of unity (Ephesians 1:10) and continues throughout chapters 2 and 3 by stressing the unity God has made possible between Jews and Gentiles (note especially Ephesians 2:14-18) and concluding  “This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 3:6, emphasis added here and below). In Ephesians 4, Paul then broadens the concept of unity to the whole church, instructing us:

Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it (Ephesians 4: 3–7).

Seen properly in this context, it becomes clear that far from meaning that there is only one faith (ours and not theirs) and one baptism (the way we do it, not how others perform the rite ), Paul seeks to unify the body by emphasizing its unity in all things.  Just as there is “one Lord,” so there is “one faith” and “one baptism,” etc. These are all examples of things that unify us rather than divide us.   In other words, we all worship the same Lord, we are all part of the same faith, and all share the same way of life -  our essential beliefs and actions show the unity we have, or should have, in Christ.

The whole of Ephesians is written from the perspective of the unity we share, the unity which is the basis of our relationships in Christ, despite our differences.  And Paul is not blind to those differences but sees them as part of a unified body of Christ: “From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work” (Ephesians 4:16) “for we are all members of one body” (Ephesians 4:25).  That is perhaps why Paul ends his epistle by saying “Grace to all who love our Lord Jesus Christ with an undying love” (Ephesians 6:24).
​
Doctrinal accuracy is important, of course, but we must always be careful that we do not overuse the concept so that minor matters become a hindrance to unity in the body of Christ.  The Sermon on the Mount indicates the kingdom of God is not so much about the pure in doctrine as the pure in heart. Ultimately, it is the presence of the Spirit of God within us and our way of life, not the minor details of our beliefs, that define our identity as members of the body of Christ. 

King David’s life and reign  are so well documented in the Bible that the many people involved – truly a cast of hundreds – can be confusing at times. But the identity of some of these individuals is important for understanding David’s story.*

For example, the individual Zeruiah is named a total of twenty-six times (twice as many times as Nehemiah, for example) in four separate books of the Old Testament. Zeruiah also had three prominent sons: Joab, Abishai, and Asahel (2 Samuel 2:18).  But who was Zeruiah?

The answer to this question is found in the genealogy of David, recorded in 1 Chronicles 2:3-16. This genealogical summary records that David had seven older brothers (also mentioned in 1 Samuel 16:10-11) and two sisters. Zeruiah was one of David’s two sisters, and the three sons of Zeruiah (Joab, Abishai, and Asahel) were David’s nephews.  This explains a number of otherwise puzzling events or circumstances in David’s reign.

For example, 2 Samuel tells us that when David’s son Absalom attempted to forcibly take the kingship and sought to kill his father, he made Amasa the commander of the Israelite army (2 Samuel 17:25).  Even though Amasa led the forces that tried to overthrow and kill David at this time, once Absalom had been defeated King David retained Amasa as commander of the army in place of the previous commander Joab who had disobeyed David by killing Absalom.
We might wonder why David would trust Amasa,  but the answer to this question is found in 2 Samuel 17:25 and 1 Chronicles 2:16–17.  Amasa was the son of a woman called Abigail (not David’s wife by that name).  This Abigail was David’s other sister in addition to Zeruiah (1 Chronicles 2:16).  So Amasa was David’s nephew. This is why David asked Amasa, “Are you not my own flesh and blood?” (2 Samuel 19:13).

Unfortunately for Amasa, Joab (the son of Zeruiah) killed his cousin to regain his role as head of Israel’s army.  The fact that Joab was David’s nephew explains  why David would not execute him despite his crimes, but had Solomon kill him – as Solomon did not have the same direct familial ties to the commander.

Royal politics, as with many other aspects of life in the biblical world, were often driven by such family connections and relationships.  Responsibilities to close family members were particularly strong, and it was rare for individuals in power to kill or even punish close relatives unless they were perceived as a direct threat. In the cases we have looked at here, David not only would have had to break this societal attitude if he had executed his nephews Amasa or Joab, but also he would have disgraced his own sisters by doing so.

The identity of David’s two sisters helps us to understand David’s actions or lack of action on several occasions and looking at the family connections involved can often help us to understand the story of this and other Old Testament kings.

*Download a free copy of our e-book Lessons from Old Testament Leaders, here.

Lessons from the Life of Jesus: Practical Insights from the Gospels has always been one of the most popular downloads on this site and is now even better!  The new, expanded, third edition includes five new chapters – enhancing an already helpful book and adding many new practical lessons.

Rather than simply retelling the story of the life of Jesus, this e-book focuses on some of the details of the Gospel narratives that are easy to miss, but which can help us to better understand his life and teachings.  In each case there are lessons we can learn and apply – sometimes with the potential for an effect on our lives that is well out of proportion to the seemingly small detail that conveys the lesson.

Enrich your understanding of the life and work of Jesus and take away lessons you can apply today.  You can download a copy in any of three formats – .pdf, .epub, and .mobi – to read on your computer, smart phone, or e-book reader.  No registration or email address is needed - simply click and download from our e-books page here.

Every Christian knows Jesus’ words that his followers were to be the “salt of the earth” and the “light of the world” (Matthew 5:13-16).  Being the light of the world seems easy to understand – it clearly involves the responsibility to “illuminate” the world through the witness of our lives and, of course, to reflect the light of the God who himself can be described as “Light.”

​But what about the salt – what exactly does that represent?  Salt was used for many different purposes in the Middle East during the first century, so there are a number of possibilities regarding what Jesus intended. We should consider all of the most likely meanings.

1. Perhaps the most obvious possibility is that Jesus’ reference to our being “salt” has to do with the use of salt as a flavor enhancer (Job 6:6) –  that we are to make the world more pleasing or “palatable” to God (Romans 8:8).

2. Salt was also widely used to preserve food, especially meat which would spoil quickly in the heat of the Palestinian desert environment.   The sense of long-lasting preservation is seen in the biblical expression “a covenant of salt” (2 Chronicles 13:5).

3. Salt was utilized to purify things such as offerings made in the tabernacle or temple (Leviticus 2:13).  This is the meaning behind Jesus’ words “For everyone will be salted with fire ...” (Mark 9:49) and Paul’s words “Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt” (Colossians 4:6).

4. On the other hand, the ability of large quantities of salt to kill vegetation and render land unusable led to salt being used metaphorically for the concept of emptiness and destruction (Job 39:6, Ezekiel 16:4, etc.). 

5. Despite the fact that large quantities of salt kill all plants, much smaller quantities were used as the world’s oldest chemical fertilizer.  In fact, after vegetation has been killed by a heavy application of salt, the plants often eventually come back more profusely.  Because the word “earth” in Jesus’ expression “you are the salt of the earth” can mean “soil,” some commentators feel that he may have meant his followers were to bring new life to the world, like a little salt to soil; but the likelihood of this meaning is certainly unsure in this context. 

6. Ancient peoples also often put salt on the wicks of oil lamps to cut smoke and increase their brightness.  This meaning seems attractive as the use of salt in this sense would then be parallel with light, in believers being both “salt and light.”  But in Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:13-16, salt is discussed before light is mentioned, indicating he probably had a more common use of salt in mind.

Many other meanings have been claimed for Jesus’ words based on other uses or characteristics of salt. For example, some have claimed that just like salt, believers can make the world thirsty for God’s truth.  But this and similar ideas are somewhat fanciful and would not have been understandable in the context of what Jesus said without explanation. Likewise, it is commonly thought that Roman soldiers were paid in salt (hence the word “salary”), so that salt might have been a symbol of the disciples’ “worth,” but in fact the Empire’s soldiers were paid in normal money (or not at all), but not with salt.

Because Jesus did not explain which aspect of salt he intended in using the metaphor, we must presume that he had the most basic aspect in mind, which would mean that either or both meanings 1 and 3 above – salt as a flavor enhancer or a purifier – are most likely what he had in mind and how his hearers would have understood the expression. Understood in either of these ways, being the “salt” of the earth would certainly mean that we represent the world to God, just as in being the light of the world we represent God to humanity (Matthew 5:16).

But Jesus’ words also hold some practical aspects in his use of salt as a metaphor. After saying “you are the salt of the earth,” Jesus proceeded to say “But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men” (Matthew 5:13). This is interesting as salt cannot actually lose its saltiness unless it is diluted by water or mixed with other substances. Salt spoiled in such a way might often have simply been thrown out on the street, and it is also possible that such low grade salt was spread on Roman roads to inhibit vegetation growth. In either case it would be “trampled by men,” but the lesson would be that our belief and behavior must not be diluted by things of the world around us.

There is another way that spiritually we might lose our “saltiness.”  Jesus also told his disciples “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other” (Mark 9:50, emphasis added). This suggests that our saltiness can be lost through a lack of peace with one another, and that we may cease to fulfill our function of making the world more acceptable to God by our “saltiness” either being diluted, as we saw above, or by not living peaceably with others.   These obstacles to successful discipleship are both worth thinking about.  ​

When we read the apostle Paul’s great “Faith, Hope, and Love” summation of the most important qualities in the Christian life (1 Corinthians 13:13), it is sometimes  easy to forget the importance of other spiritual qualities that support that great triad.  One such quality is trust, which actually underlies all of Paul’s “Big Three” and enables each one to function.
​
Faith and Trust

There is a good deal of overlap between the words faith and trust in English, but they are also different.  At the most basic level, faith is a noun – it is something we have or are given. Trust is primarily a verb; it is something we do.  This is true in the Bible, also.  Although the same Hebrew and Greek words are translated as both “faith” and “trust” in the English Bible, context and the form of the words  show us whether faith or trust is meant.    
 
How does the difference between faith and trust affect us? To use a physical analogy, we believe that aircraft can fly – we probably have absolute faith in that fact – but to board a plane for a flight we also must trust the pilot. If we suspect the pilot is inebriated we might get off the plane immediately – we have faith that it can fly safely, but we do not trust that it will.
 
In the same way, we can have faith in something or someone and still not trust them.  The prophet Jonah is a Biblical example of this – Jonah had faith in God, but did not trust him (Jonah 4:2). In the New Testament, the apostle James tells us that even demons believe in God (James 2:19). They have “faith” that God exists , but they do not choose to trust and follow him.  So it is not enough to just have faith in God, we must also trust him – and the connection between faith and trust is a two-way street.  On the one hand, trust is our active response to what we already have faith in, but on the other hand, the more we develop our trust in God, the more our faith grows with it.

Hope and Trust

Hope and trust are also directly related.  If we do not really trust any person controlling a situation in which we are involved, we will have very little hope in the outcome.  That is why our trust in God is so important for a life that is truly based on hope.  We can see this principle in the book of Romans: “May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit” (Romans 15:13).   Here, Paul clearly tells us that we will be filled with the joy and peace that come from hope “as” or to the degree that we trust in God – and he stresses that fact a second time in the same verse by telling us a result of trusting God is that we will overflow with hope!

This is a principle found throughout the Bible – it is only to the extent that we trust God that we will really look forward with hope for this life and the next.  In the apostle John’s description of his vision of the new heaven and earth he tells us “He who was seated on the throne said, ‘I am making everything new!’ Then he said, ‘Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true’” (Revelation 21:5).  John reminds us that we can look forward to  renewed  life in a renewed world precisely because God is trustworthy – we can hope because we can trust!

Love and Trust

There is an old proverb that “When mistrust comes in, loves goes out” and it has often been said that we cannot deeply love those we cannot really trust because the foundation of all love is trust.  This principle  is often as true spiritually as it is physically.  Even if we say that God is able to love us with a perfect love that needs no trust, this may be true, but theologians have argued that ultimately  God’s love is based on trust in his own power to eventually bring us to love him. 

But whatever the case may be regarding God’s love for us, it is clear that our love for God, and for others, is largely built on trust.   We love God because we have first been loved (1 John 4:19), but our response to that love is based on our trust – just as David says in the Psalms: “But I trust in your unfailing love …” (Psalm 13:5).

Trust usually precedes love and is always needed to maintain it.  Trust is the glue that holds relationships together and allows them to grow.  We must be willing to extend trust to those we want to love, and we  must give ultimate trust to the One who has given us ultimate love.

The Foundation of Trust

So trust really does function as the foundation of faith, hope, and love.  But while faith, hope, and love are all ultimately gifts given to us by God, we must remember that our willingness to trust underlies the effectiveness of those gifts.  Faith, hope, and love are all doomed to falter and certainly will not grow if trust is not our response to these qualities.  It is as we learn to trust God fully that our faith is strengthened, our hope is increased, and our love grows.   Faith, hope, and love may be the most important spiritual qualities in our lives, but we must actively apply trust to receive and to grow in them.  

So how do we develop our trust in God?  In any relationship, we develop trust in someone by getting to know them and seeing that they are trustworthy.  God is completely trustworthy, of course, and the Bible shows that unequivocally:   “God is not human, that he should lie,  not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act?  Does he promise and not fulfill?” (Numbers 23:19 ). But because humans  are the way we are, most of us need to see that trustworthiness  in our lives to fully appreciate it and to respond to it.  

We do that in two ways – by getting to know God better through the study of his word – where we see countless examples of rewarded trust – and by paying close attention to the events in our own lives and the lives of others where God is clearly acting.  Gratitude plays a role here, too. If we are noticing and giving thanks on a daily basis for even the smallest things in life that show God’s help, we will  usually find that our trust grows quickly.  And as it does, so will the faith, hope, and love in our lives.                                                                 

Earlier this Spring, the Associates for Biblical Research, an American archaeological research group, announced the discovery of a curse text discovered on a small, folded lead tablet that had been found in archaeological excavations in Israel in late 2019.  The artifact is of particular interest to readers of the Bible not so much for what its inscribed text says, but for the fact that it contains the earliest instance of the Hebrew name for God – Yahweh – that has ever been found in an archaeological context, and also for its significance regarding the history of Hebrew writing and the Bible itself.

The tablet, which is barely larger than a postage stamp, contains an inscription that is believed to be centuries older than any known Hebrew inscription from ancient Israel. The small international team of scientists studying the artifact employed advanced tomographic scans to recover the text, slowly recovering one after another of the artifact’s written letters. When the text had been completely recovered, the textual specialists could tell that the text reads:

Cursed, cursed, cursed – cursed by the God YHW.
You will die cursed.
Cursed you will surely die.
Cursed by YHW – cursed, cursed, cursed.
 
This “curse text” was found in discarded material from an archaeological excavation on Mt. Ebal near modern Nablus.  Significantly, this was the site, according to Deuteronomy 27 and Joshua 8, where the people of ancient Israel were instructed by God to recite curses on those who did not obey the Law of God.  As a result, the site became associated with cursing, and numerous artifacts such as the newly translated tablet were left there in ancient times.  Joshua 8:30 tells us that Joshua built an altar on Mt. Ebal and the curse tablet was found in the location where Joshua’s altar is believed to have stood and where its possible remains have been found.

But the new text is tremendously important as it may well represent both the oldest known example of written Hebrew, and also the oldest known example of the Hebrew YHW [or YHWH]– the name for God often transliterated as Yahweh.  The find, which predates the famous Dead Sea Scrolls by more than a millennium, is so significant because the text seems to date to the Iron Age I or Late Bronze Age periods –  around 1200 BC at the latest, and perhaps as early as 1400 BC or earlier.  Either way, this is centuries before the oldest previously known Hebrew texts and instances of the name of God in Hebrew outside the Bible.

This fact strongly argues against those who attempt to date the Bible to much later centuries by claiming that the ancient Hebrews were not literate and that the biblical books were probably not written down till around 700 BC.   And it is important to stress that the new text is not only Hebrew writing, but also that it is a sophisticated composition written in a carefully balanced “chiastic parallelism” or crossover style found in many of the biblical writings and often said to be a mark of “developed” writing characteristic of later dates. 

The date of the earliest Hebrew inscriptions has, in fact, been continuously pushed back in recent years.  A nearly 3,000-year-old inscription called the stele of Mesha in which the king of Moab boasts of his victories against the Kingdom of Israel and its god Yahweh, contained the earliest known extra-biblical mention of the God of the Bible for a number of years after its discovery in 1868.

Since then, even older inscriptions have been found. An inscription found in what is today Sudan, in the temple of Soleb dedicated to the Egyptian god Amon-Re and built by the Pharaoh Amenhotep III (1378-1348 BC),  has more recently been seen as the oldest known reference to Yahweh, God of Israel.

The new discovery from Mt. Ebal may be older than even the very early Soleb inscription, and continuing study by a wide range of ancient textual specialists will doubtless help to narrow down its date more precisely.  

A new, revised, and expanded edition of one of our more popular downloads – Spotlight on the Psalms: A Closer Look at One of the Bible's Best-Loved Books –  by R. Herbert, is now available for free download.            
                                                                                                                                  
Psalms is the Old Testament book most often quoted in the New Testament and most frequently read today.  The new second edition of  Spotlight on the Psalms includes more biblical, cultural, and even archaeological background information to enrich this practical commentary that can help you to better understand the psalms and better apply their messages in your own life.

Download a free copy of this new edition in the format of your choice, from our sister-site, here.

Of all the prophecies found in the Bible, perhaps the most amazing are those found in the twenty-second psalm.  The clearly prophetic details of the death of the individual spoken of in Psalm 22 match the New Testament accounts of the crucifixion of Christ found in the four Gospels to such a degree that they remain a central part of Christian faith in the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Skeptics have certainly attempted to negate the prophetic aspects of this psalm, which was composed approximately 1,000 years before the life of Christ, but the reality of its foretelling cannot be ascribed to sheer coincidence. 

Certainly parts of Psalm 22 may have had a preliminary application to events in the life of David himself, but many of its details – such as the dividing of the individual's clothes and the casting lots for them, and the piercing of his hands and feet – obviously did not. 

In the same way, it is clear that the crucifixion of Jesus was witnessed by a great many individuals, and it is unrealistic in the extreme to suggest that the early Christians simply said that all the details mentioned in Psalm 22 occurred at the death of Jesus when so many could have contradicted them if that were not the case.

Here are just some of the statements found in Psalm 22 alongside their parallels in the Gospel accounts of Jesus' crucifixion.  A number of other correspondences can be seen by reading the psalm in its entirety, but consider the following selected examples:
 
Psalm 22:1 My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Matthew 27:46 About the ninth hour Jesus cried…“My God, My God, Why have you forsaken me?”
 
Psalm 22:7 All who see me mock me;
Matthew 27:41 In the same way the chief priests, the teachers of the law and the elders mocked him
 
Psalm 22:7 they hurl insults, shaking their heads.
Matthew 27:39 Those who passed by hurled insults at him, shaking their heads
 
Psalm 22:8 “He trusts in the Lord,” they say, “let the Lord rescue him. Let him deliver him …”
Matthew 27:43 He trusts in God. Let God rescue him now if he wants him …
 
Psalm 22:14 I am poured out like water,
John 19:34 ... pierced Jesus’ side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water.
 
Psalm 22:15 My mouth is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
John 19:28 Later… so that Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, "I am thirsty"...
 
Psalm 22:16 … they pierce my hands and my feet.
John 19:23a … the soldiers crucified Jesus
 
Psalm 22:18  They divide my clothes among them and cast lots for my garment…
John 19:23-24a When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining … “Let’s not tear it,” they said, “Let’s decide by lot who gets it.”
 
Psalm 22 does not end with the death of the one it describes, however.  The psalm continues by speaking of a time beyond the death of that clearly messianic individual:
​
All the ends of the earth
will remember and turn to the Lord,
and all the families of the nations
will bow down before him,
for dominion belongs to the Lord
and he rules over the nations.
All the rich of the earth will feast and worship;
all who go down to the dust will kneel before him –
those who cannot keep themselves alive.
Posterity will serve him;
future generations will be told about the Lord.
They will proclaim his righteousness,
declaring to a people yet unborn:
He has done it! (Psalm 22:27-31).
 
Notice especially the closing words of the psalm: “He has done it!”  These words, referring to the future culmination of the purposes of God beyond the suffering and death of the promised Messiah, were also closely echoed in the final words of Jesus on the cross:  “It is finished!” (John 19:30) – words marking not the end, but the beginning of his victory. 

Sometimes a single word – even a small one – can make a big difference in understanding a verse or passage of the Bible.  Take the English word “so,” for example.  The English word “so” can be ambiguous. We can say “so long,” “it’s so hot today,” “so can you,” and “so, are you going?” – all with different meanings.   This can lead to problems and mistakes of understanding in reading the Bible, because the Greek word houtos which is often translated “so” in many Bibles does not have that kind of ambiguity – it simply means  “in this way,” (as when Jesus says “you should pray in this way…” in Matthew 6:9).  However, because of the ambiguity of the word “so” we can easily make wrong assumptions about what is meant when that English word is used to translate houtos

Consider a simple but interesting example.   In John 3:16 – the best-known verse in the New Testament and perhaps of the whole Bible – we read “God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son …”   Most people presume this means that God loved the world “so much” that he gave his Son  (in fact some versions, such as the Message Bible, actually mistranslate the verse that way). But houtos does not mean “so much.” It almost always means  “in this way,” and what John 3:16 really tells us is the manner in which God loved the world – how, not how much. That is the clear meaning of the verse, and it is translated as such by modern Bible versions such as the Christian Standard Bible (“For God loved the world in this way …”) rather than using the ambiguous English word “so” which can mean “in this way,” but which is usually presumed to mean “so much”!

But this is not just an interesting minor detail of New Testament Greek. The meaning of houtos and the confusion that arises when it is translated “so” can sometimes affect matters of doctrine and Christian living.  A good example is found in Paul’s words regarding the Lord’s Supper in 1 Corinthians.   The King James Version translates a key part of Paul’s instruction: “But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup” (1 Corinthians 11:28 KJV, emphasis added here and below).  Here we can see the ambiguous “so” which could easily be understood in this verse as meaning that we should examine ourselves (ahead of time) so that we are properly prepared to take the bread and wine.  Many translations actually render the verse that way – along the lines of what is found in the New International Version: “Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup” (1 Corinthians 11:28 NIV), or the International Standard Version “A person must examine himself and then eat the bread and drink from the cup.”

Versions that follow this path leave the reader with the understanding that we must examine ourselves first, and then – as a consequence or a result of having done so – we should eat the bread and drink the wine.   But as we saw above, the Greek word houtos which is translated ambiguously as “so” in the KJV rendering of this verse, and as “then,” “before,” or in some similar way in other translations, does not carry these meanings.   When we translate the word houtos correctly as “in this manner,” we see that Paul’s meaning was that those who participate in the Lord’s Supper should do so in a self-examining manner as they participate, rather than before they do.  

Several recent versions of the New Testament have been careful to follow the clear meaning of houtos and translate 1 Corinthians 11:28 as it should be understood. For example, “But let a man examine himself, and in this manner let him eat of the bread, and let him drink of the cup” (Berean Literal Bible) and “Let a person examine himself; in this way let him eat the bread and drink from the cup” (Christian Standard Bible).   In these translations it is much easier to see that Paul’s instruction was not to examine ourselves before we take the bread and wine, but as we do so.  Put another way, the self-examination Paul urges is not a completed action performed a number of hours or days before partaking of the bread and wine, but  a present, continuous action during the Lord’s Supper.

This understanding of the verse helps us to better see Paul’s point regarding self-examination.  It is certainly not intended to help us determine if we are somehow worthy to take the Lord’s Supper – we are all unworthy, and that is one of the reasons we take it – but to help us participate in the Supper in a spiritually conscious manner – to make sure that we are not guilty of the excesses and improper taking of the Supper in those ways Paul condemns in the immediate context of 1 Corinthians 11:28.  

Fortunately, a number of newer Bible versions are starting to follow the clear meaning of houtos  in whatever context it is found – and in doing so they remind us of just how careful we need to be in the translational use of that unassuming but highly ambiguous English word, “so.”

It is often said that the best Bible is the one you will read. But given that basic truth, some Bible translations are better for specific tasks. Some translations make studying easier and more enjoyable, some are easier to memorize, and some are more accurate and profitable to study – getting as close as possible to what the biblical writers wrote and helping us to better understand their message.

That’s where the new, free, e-book Which Bible Should I Use? comes in.  It is specifically designed and written to help you choose and use the best translation for your needs – and that could be one you have not heard of before. On the other hand, perhaps the best Bible for you is the one you are using now. But even if it is, this book may be worth your time by helping you to assess the version you are using, to know more about its strengths and limitations, and to get the most from it. You may also discover other translations in this book that complement the Bible you are now using – for even greater understanding and engagement with the Scriptures!

Take your Bible study up a notch – download this free new book directly (without registration or having to give an email address) in formats for computer, e-book reader, or smartphone – here.

As he closes his magnificent epistle to the church in Rome, the apostle Paul sends greetings to a number of his friends, co-workers, and acquaintances in the city. The list, given in Romans 16:1-16,  is extensive –  almost thirty individuals are mentioned as well as several groups of people – and nowhere else in Paul’s letters do we find such a long catalog of names.   As we read Romans today it is very easy to skim-read this list, noting the few names we may recognize and then finishing the epistle.  But there is more to the list than immediately meets the eye, and like everything in Paul’s writings, we can learn from it.  

First, of course, we see in this long list of individuals the degree to which Paul truly loved the church – knowing, remembering, and greeting a large number of people in a city he did not even personally know. Because of his constant travel and evangelization Paul must have met a great number of people, and it is impressive that he remembered not only the names of many of the people on his list, but also  their individual qualities.

We also see in Paul’s list his warm acceptance of all Christians – regardless of race, gender, social position, or any other consideration. The majority of the individuals mentioned in his list have Gentile names, and a large proportion are the names of slaves or  former slaves who had been freed.  Such were Tertius (verse 22) and Quartus (verse 24) whose names mean simply “Third” and “Fourth,” as they were probably minor slaves in someone’s household and simply given numbers as names, as was often the case.  These individuals were not even the “First” or “Second” slaves, making them truly socially insignificant in that culture; but Paul treated them, as he did every believer, with full equality and love. In fact, Paul mentions Quartus in the same breath as Erastus, the influential and important Corinthian director of public works (verse 23).  

Looking at what Paul says about all these people is particularly instructive. Phoebe, who is mentioned first in Romans 16:1-2, was evidently the person who delivered Paul’s letter to Rome, and the apostle’s greetings actually begin after she is mentioned.  Paul then specifically greets some twenty-eight individuals. Rather than just being an extensive list of greetings with an occasional personal comment thrown in here and there, however, if we look closely, we see a clear pattern.  Paul refers to the people he lists in seven different ways:

1.   Those Paul calls “beloved.”  Paul was well aware that God referred to his own son as “beloved” (Colossians 1:13) and doubtless did not use the expression lightly. He mentions only a few people this way.  
2.  Those who had helped Paul in some exceptional way such as  “risked their lives for me,” or “been a mother to me.”
3.  Those Paul says “worked very hard” doing God’s work.
4. Those Paul says “worked hard” doing God’s work.
5.  Individuals mentioned as being “fellow workers” without any other comment.
6.  Individuals who Paul notes as being fellow Christians who are specifically said to be “in Christ,” “in the Lord,” or “approved by Christ,” but of whom nothing else is said.
7. Some individuals are simply named, along with many others who are unnamed but included in someone’s family or household.  Although these people were doubtless Christians, they are included in the list without any qualifying remarks regarding outstanding characteristics.
 
The first thing we notice about Paul’s list, when we organize it in this manner, is the way in which he differentiates between those who are said to be involved in furthering the work of the gospel in some way, and those other individuals and groups who are said to be Christians but of whom nothing is said relative to the gospel work.  Paul doubtless deeply loved and cared about these latter individuals, but seemingly did not remember them as being notable in their service to God. Numerically, the majority of the people Paul greets are not given any special commendation and fall into this category (see verses 5 and 14–15, especially).

Those mentioned in group 6 who were said to be “approved by Christ” or described by a similar expression may have been particularly devout, though no reference is made relative to them being involved in the work of the gospel.

On the other hand, those who Paul  mentions specifically regarding their service to the gospel were certainly not all elders in the Church and served in different roles and capacities. Some, such as the lady mentioned only as “the mother of Rufus” (verse 13) clearly were extraordinarily dedicated to God’s work.  Others, such as Andronicus and Junia, had even been in prison with Paul (verse 7), showing their dedication to the gospel in that way.  

We cannot see any quantitative assessment of the work accomplished by these godly people in what Paul says, just his appreciation for their dedication.  But when we move past the individuals who are mentioned as having helped Paul personally, and those whom he calls “beloved” (yet we are not told why they are so regarded),  the remaining people on Paul’s list are the ones he shows were most actively involved in doing the work of God.  These remaining individuals are said to be  “fellow workers,” “those who work hard,” and “those who work very hard.”
​
We cannot know whether Paul was subconsciously or consciously “grading” these people as he greeted them in these ways, but it is clear that they were a minority among the larger group of Christians Paul greeted in his epistle, and that there was a difference in Paul’s mind between the level of dedication of the individuals he mentions.  It is also hard to imagine Paul – who wrote so carefully and deeply – as including the public grading of individuals without having a purpose in doing so. Perhaps that purpose was for the good of those whom he greeted, but perhaps it was for our good, also. We can all ask ourselves which group Paul would have included us in.

Asking that question of ourselves can be both instructive and challenging. After all, as Paul wrote to Timothy: “All scripture” – including the list of names found in Romans 16  – “is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (1 Timothy 3:16–17, emphasis added). If we let it, Paul’s list of greetings can inspire the people of the gospel to more and greater involvement in God’s work. 

“Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?” (1 Corinthians 15:29).
 
The apostle Paul’s words in his first letter to the Corinthian church have puzzled many Christians for centuries.  Some denominations have extrapolated from the verse and have instituted a ritual by which a living believer is baptized in lieu of a person who is already deceased, and who was never baptized in their lifetime.  But is this kind of “baptism for the dead” what Paul is really talking about?

The apostle may have been referring to one of four possible logical and historical situations:
​
1. The possibility that the early Christians were indeed being physically baptized on behalf of those who had died – perhaps before they could be baptized.  This possibility is extremely unlikely as the New Testament clearly shows that baptism, while commanded, is not a requirement for salvation per se, and that sometimes it cannot be carried out (Luke 23:42–43; etc.).

2. Paul could have been referring to a pagan Greek custom, or to an unscriptural practice of vicarious baptism being followed by some members of the Corinthian church. This could be possible as Paul says “those” who do this, not “we.” But it is unlikely as we have no other record of such a practice in Corinth or elsewhere in the very early church (it is first documented in the third century AD).

3. Because baptism is a symbolic death to sin and a resurrection to righteousness (Romans 6:3–4), everyone who is baptized is, in that sense, symbolically baptized “for the dead” – that is, by baptism he or she proclaims the death of the old person and the new life in Christ.  This was said to be Paul’s meaning by the early Church father, Chrysostom (c. AD 347-), and is certainly possible.

4. A final possibility that is suggested by the context of Paul’s statement is that the apostle was referring metaphorically to the “baptism” of trial and suffering through which the followers of Christ are called to go (Matthew 16:24).  This fits with Paul’s words elsewhere linking our suffering with Christ’s death and resurrection (Philippians 3:10; etc.). The fact that the concept of baptism is used in exactly this sense in Matthew 3:11 and Mark 10:38–39, and that Paul goes on in 1 Corinthians to speak of suffering, also makes this meaning possible. Finally, Paul’s use of the ongoing present tense in his use of the word “baptized” in 1 Corinthians 15:29 makes this  possibility of  the baptism of suffering very likely.

Whichever possibility reflects the situation behind Paul’s statement, it is clear that a physical ritual of vicarious baptism for those who had died (possibility 1) is the least likely of all the meanings the verse could have. It is also a cardinal principle of proper biblical interpretation that we should never establish doctrine on uncertain verses of Scripture. Given that principle and the likelihood that Paul’s comment was either symbolic or metaphorical, there is no reason to invent a ritual practice that is nowhere commanded in the Bible. 

Whatever Paul was referring to in 1 Corinthians 15:29, he simply says that if there is no resurrection, why would baptism for the dead occur or make any sense. Paul’s point in this section of his letter has nothing directly to do with baptism, and everything to do with the certainty of Christian suffering and resurrection.

He had been invited, of course – not that he needed an invitation! – and we had saved a place for him.  But he had not come to dinner for the past week, and it was beginning to look as though he would not be coming to dinner again any time soon.  He may just have been busy, of course; any apostle – and especially the chief apostle – must have so many responsibilities. But it was strange, nonetheless. Some were even beginning to wonder if they had offended him, or if fellowship with the Gentile converts was not  a pressing issue just now.  But surely, it couldn’t be, as some had even suggested, that Peter named Cephas viewed us as somehow less than equal in the fellowship of Christ … could it?

In the second  chapter of Galatians  Paul tells the amazing story:

“When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face … For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray” (Galatians 2:11-13).

Paul’s stand against Peter’s hypocrisy must have been a legendary event in the early Church. Paul certainly did not skirt the issue:

“When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?” (Galatians 2:14).

Fortunately, Peter had the humility to accept Paul’s reprimand (something worth thinking about in itself) and changed his behavior – fellowshipping again with the Gentile believers.  Clearly, he learned a valuable lesson, one which lies behind the words written in one of his own epistles years later: “Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers…” (1 Peter 2:17).

But this story is given in the Bible for our admonition, not Peter’s.  Do we avoid certain people in the faith for any reason? Do we not fully accept other believers because of some difference in doctrine or belief?  The apostle Peter made this mistake – are we above it? 

We know that we are to “keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching” (2 Thessalonians 3:6 and also see vs. 14), but that does not apply to believers who are sincerely trying to do God’s will.  The writings of Paul and Luke, in Acts, make it abundantly clear that Gentile believers were to be fully accepted as brothers and sisters in the faith – even though they may not have had complete doctrinal understanding (Acts 15:28).   This principle also applies directly to us, of course, in dealing with fellow believers of other doctrinal persuasions.  We may not agree with each other on things that we consider to be important, but that does not preclude our fellowship and helping one another in the faith.  Even though we may understand that principle intellectually, we must all ask ourselves whether there is some reason we are not showing up for dinner.

When we read Paul’s letter to Philemon, we tend to focus on the story of Onesimus – the slave who apparently left Philemon at some point and whom Paul now exhorts Philemon to take back as a brother in the faith.  But a good portion of this short Epistle actually consists of what Paul has to say about Philemon himself; and beginning early in the letter Paul commends Philemon:

“I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers, because I hear of your love and of the faith that you have toward the Lord Jesus and for all the saints, and I pray that the sharing of your faith may become effective for the full knowledge of every good thing that is in us for the sake of Christ (Philemon 1:4-6 – italics added for emphasis).

Interestingly, two things often cause people to be confused within these two small verses.  First, many popular expositions of the book get tangled up in trying to explain how Philemon had love for Christ and faith toward the saints, but this expression is just a chiasmus, or crossover, as was often used in Greek. It should be understood as “faith” in “the Lord Jesus” and “love” for “all the saints” rather than the other way around, as it might appear. You can see a clear example of this kind of chiasmus in Matthew 12:22,  which tells us “The blind and dumb both spoke and saw” – which clearly means the blind saw, and the dumb spoke.

The second often misunderstood point about these verses is found in Paul’s statement “I pray that the sharing of your faith may become effective…” (Philemon 1:6, NKJV). I wish I had the proverbial dollar for the number of times I have heard and seen this verse used as a proof text that we should verbally witness or share our faith with others, but the real meaning is different and makes an important point. Here, the expression “the sharing of your faith” seems to mean not verbally sharing but rather communicating one’s faith through an outpouring of good works. The NIV captures this meaning quite well: “I pray that your partnership with us in the faith may be effective in deepening your understanding of every good thing we share for the sake of Christ” (Philemon 1:6).

The Nineteenth Century “Barnes Notes” commentary first summed up the meaning of this verse relative to how Philemon’s faith was to be expressed: “That his faith, expressing itself by good fruits, might be shown to be true … For although faith has its proper seat in the heart, yet it communicates itself to men by good works.”  Most commentaries since that time have agreed that this is the clear meaning of verse 6. 

So, properly understood,  these verses in Paul’s letter to Philemon make two important points:  first, they show the necessary link between our faith in Christ and love of the saints (Philemon 1:4-5), and then they show that the faith within us should be “communicated” or “shared” by good works (vs. 6).  This two-pronged argument represents something Paul wanted to stress to Philemon:  that faith in Christ involves loving the brethren, and that this true faith is manifested in good works to them.  These are important points for our understanding of the Book of Philemon, and of faith, too.

Our latest free ebook, Take Courage! The Vital Quality Every Christian Must Have, has just been published and is ready for download in multiple formats.   The topic is an important one. We live in an age when courage is seldom found and often unappreciated, but the Bible commands us to utilize courage in many areas of our lives. Take Courage! explains why courage is vitally important for every Christian and looks at how we can have real courage in our own lives. Don’t think courage is just for heroes – this is a book that may change many aspects of your life. Download a free copy (no email or registration needed) here.

Luke’s Gospel indicates that the evangelist may have particularly appreciated good food – at least it shows clearly that he noticed and commented on food more than any other Gospel writer!  But Luke does not simply mention food and meals – he draws lessons from them.
​
As a frame of reference, we should notice that Luke’s account of the life of Jesus really does have a noticeable focus on food. For example, while Matthew uses the word “eat” 18 times, and John only 15 times, Luke uses the word 33 times. Mark also uses this word quite frequently (25 times), but overall Luke uses a number of eating and food-related words twice as many times as Mark and the other Gospels, so his emphasis on this is clear. Within his Gospel, Luke also – uniquely – describes ten meals in which Jesus participated, and we will look at them all briefly.   Click here to continue reading.