Leave Those Christians Alone!

Posted on 02/22/2013 by Paul Pavao

Back when I was first diagnosed with leukemia, I thought, “I’m going to trust God. I’m going to live by the grace of God, go through chemotherapy counting it all joy to have fallen into this trial, and be a testimony to God.”

I knew I could only do that by God’s grace. I was not depending on myself, but on him who strengthens us to do all things.

That was all good and fine. He did give grace, and I did what I hoped I would do. I endured, and am enduring, the treatment for leukemia with joy and delight.

I thought that would be something unusual.

Nope.

Robin Roberts of Good Morning America went through breast cancer and then a blood cancer called Myelodysplastic Syndrome publicly, bravely, and cheerfully. Tony Snow, former White House press secretary, prefaced a discussion of his health problems with, “I’m a very lucky guy,” even though he was aware the cancer would kill him.

The point is, I just wasn’t unusual. Those two were in the public, but I spent ten months either living in the Vanderbilt Medical Center or visiting it every day. It seemed to me that the majority of cancer patients were remarkably cheerful.

My wife snapped a picture of me helping a man out of a wheelchair into a pickup truck when I could barely walk myself. My experience was, that’s what we cancer patients do. Maybe there’s some sort of lesson about life in cancer. Cancer patients “get it.”

So do …

Sufferers of Adversity

Remember 9/11? Of course you do. That’s just a transition to get to the next point.

It stirred people up. It roused patriotism, and people leaped up to help.

Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy brought great destruction. They also stirred a great outpouring of cash and volunteers.

Don’t mess with people. You may be surprised at what you find inside of them.

Sufferers of Peace

Ever wondered about people when you don’t mess with them?

Back in the day, when schools were still allowed to teach things like this, I learned that the reason Rome fell was because they got immoral and indolent.

You want to mess up a society? Leave it alone, give it a lot of peace and prosperity without any adversity. Now that messes people up.

How To Make a Church Fail

I wrote an ebook discussing the fall of the church in the fourth century. I know a lot of people hate it when I use the term “fall of the church.” I’m not really free to care what they think because it’s an accurate term.

The ebook, just 20 pages long or so, discusses the fact that persecution didn’t work on the church, but peace did. It’s based on real history, and I like to think it’s pretty interesting because it’s written from the devil’s perspective.

You’ve heard that those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it? American Christianity is in a time of peace, and it’s a wreck. Personally, I don’t think we should wait around for persecution or a massive economic depression to get things together. I think we should be frightened of our wonderful circumstances and our embarrassing lack of commitment to Christ and repent.

I don’t want anything in exchange for the ebook. You don’t even have to give me your email address. You can download it by clicking below:

How To Make a Church Fail free download (.pdf file)

Posted in History, Miscellaneous | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Women Pastors & “Course of Performance”

Posted on 02/20/2013 by Paul Pavao

One of the best arguments for knowing the common, widespread teachings of the second-century Christians is a legal term: “Course of Performance.”

LegalDictionary.com defines it this way:

Evidence of the conduct of parties concerning the execution of obligations under a contract requiring more than one performance that is used for the purpose of interpreting the contract’s provisions.

Huh?

The first line in their article about “course of performance” is easier to understand:

Course of performance refers to the systematic and uniform conduct in which parties engage after they enter into a contract.

Example:

A warehouse stores and ships books for a publishing company. The two companies have a contract dating from 1954. The contract specifies that the publisher must pay rent to A for the space occupied by the books.

In 2013, the publisher adds more books, which are put on pallet racks above the shelving currently being used for the publisher’s other books. The warehouse increases the rent because the publisher is now using more cubic volume of space. The publisher objects, because the square footage being used has not increased.

The contract does not specify how the rent is to be determined.

If this dispute were taken to a court of law, the court would determine the meaning of the contract, cubic feet or square feet, based on the “course of performance,” if it could be determined. In other words, how have the companies determined the rent for the last 59 year? That will determine the meaning of the contract to the original parties.

This is very applicable to the apostles writings. It is not just two companies disputing the meaning of their writings. It is thousands of denominations.

Fortunately—though some whose traditions are dashed in the process don’t think so—the “course of performance” concerning the apostles writings can often be determined fairly confidently.

Which brings us to the point of this post …

Example: Women Pastors

J. Lee Grady, one of my favorite columnists, put up an article called, “Why I Defend Women Preachers. As usual, it is well-written, and it addresses the main issue in the argument concerning women in church leadership: 1 Tim 2:11-14 (and 1 Cor. 14:34-35, which he does not address) versus the commendations Paul gave to women who were apparently in leadership, such as Phoebe (Rom. 16:2), Junia (Rom. 16:7), Euodias, and Syntyche (Php. 4:2-3).

He suggests that Paul is only silencing heretical women in 1 Tim. 2.

That’s one solution. The problem is, it completely ignores the course of performance. For centuries, there is no indication the churches ever allowed a woman in any leadership position. Woman were servants (deaconnesses), but “deacon” (properly, “servant”) was not an ordained position in the early churches, as overseer (or bishop) and elder were. There is simply no record of a woman overseer or elder for centuries in the churches the apostles started.

Thus, Mr. Grady, with all due respect, is almost certainly wrong in his interpretation.

In fact, to the “course of performance,” I would add that Paul gives his reasons in 1 Tim. 2:11-15, and his reasons do not include “these women are heretics.”

Instead, based on the “course of performance,” it is much more likely than the women who are commended in the verses above were not ordained leaders. Instead, they were in whatever way helpers to Paul and other men. In fact, Phoebe is specifically said to be a servant, a “deaconness,” in Rom. 16:2, not an overseer or elder.

Caveat: This Is Not the First or Second Century

There are a lot of things that should keep us humble in applying what I’ve said to today’s practice in the churches.

  1. Churches today are in shambles. The role of pastor in today’s church is nothing like the role of pastor in the Scriptures. They are qualified differently, they serve differently, and they lead churches that are drastically different than the churches we find in the Scriptures and in early church history.
  2. We must never forget Deborah, who judged Israel, nor even Samson, who was probably the most unrighteous servant of God ever. God uses whom he must. If a man isn’t doing the job, may God be praised that he raised up a woman to do it.
  3. There may be a cultural element to Paul’s instructions.

Take your stand where you will, but I warn you to beware that you do not become a pharisee in your “correct” interpretations of Scripture. Jesus was not fond of them, and he gave more mercy to prostitutes and tax collectors than he did to self-confident interpreters of Scripture.

You search the Scriptures because you think that you will find life in them. The Scriptures testify of me! Yet you refuse to come to me so that you might have life. (Jn. 5:39-40)

A Story

I met a lady once who had started seven churches in the Dominican Republic. (Her name was Mercedes if anyone reading this knows of her.)

Her husband was German, so when she was in Germany with her husband back in 1986, I went to hear her at a Bible Study. The teaching was very in-depth. (I now believe it was probably too in-depth and inappropriate for that audience.)

Afterward, I went to Mercedes. I was quite young, and she was over 50, so I went very respectfully, as I recommend you do if you are ever in the same situation. I asked her, “What do you do with 1 Tim. 2? I don’t mean to be accusing or argumentative, but I’m just trying to figure out where I should stand or if there is something I’m missing.”

She got out a couple sentences, trying to explain how 1 Tim. 2 could allow for women teachers—or apostles for that matter, for she was a church planter over seven churches. Finally, she sputtered a bit and said, “I don’t know why Paul said that! I wish he hadn’t!”

I laughed. I still laugh when I tell the story.

I LOVE her answer.

Why would I love an answer like that? Because it was honest. What was she supposed to do? Go back to Santa Domingo and send everyone off to other churches?

These churches were no ordinary churches. They were real churches, where Christians got together for no other reason than that they were Christians. These churches understood what it meant to be the church. They were family, devoted to one another. Elders she appointed were appointed for the right reason: established character lived out among the congregation.

May there be more like her.

Posted in Church, History, Modern Doctrines | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fulfilling the Law (Matthew 5:17)

Posted on 02/19/2013 by Paul Pavao

One of the more controversial verses in the apostles’ writings is Matthew 5:17:

Do not thing that I came to abolish [kataluo: to dissolve, disunite, destroy, demolish, overthrow, render vain, bring to naught, subvert] the Law or the prophets. I did not come to destroy [kataluo], but to fulfill [pleroo: to make full, to fill up, to fill to the full, to complete]

What did Jesus mean by this?

We really don’t have to wonder. He told us!

Except for verses 18-20, which complete the statement, the rest of Matthew 5 is spent explaining Matthew 5:17. What did Jesus mean by fulfilling—or better, “filling up”—the Law? He meant that we should not just avoid murder, but even hate. We should not just love our neighbors, but also our enemies. We should not just fulfill our vows, but fulfill every word that comes out of our mouth.

We don’t like the idea that Jesus brought a new law, but the Scripture says that he did:

For the priesthood being changed, there is of necessity a change of law. (Heb. 7:12)

The early Christians used the term “new law” regularly. A search of the first volume of The Ante-Nicene Fathers shows that it is used 5 times. Interesting usages!

  • [God] has revealed to us by all the prophets that he needs neither sacrifices nor burnt offerings nor oblations, saying, ” … I am full of burnt offerings and do not desire the fat of lambs … for who has required these things from your hands? Do not tread my courts anymore … Incense is a vain abomination to me, and your new moons and Sabbaths I cannot endure” [Isa. 1:11-14] He has therefore abolished these things so that the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is without the yoke of necessity, might have a human oblation. (<a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.vi.ii.ii.html&quot; target="_blank"Letter of Barnabas 2)
  • If … God proclaimed a new covenant which was to be instituted, and that for a light of the nations, we see and are persuaded that men approach God, leaving their idols and other unrighteousness, through the name of him who was crucified, Jesus Christ, and remain in their confession until death and maintain godliness. Moreover, by the works and attendant miracles, it is possible for all to understand that he is the new law, the new covenant, and the expectation of those who out of every people wait for good things from God. (Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew 12)
  • The Lawgiver is present, yet you do not see him. To the poor the Gospel is preached, the blind see, yet you do not understand [Isa. 61:1; Matt. 11:5; Luke 4:18; 7:22]. You now have need of a second circumcision, though you glory greatly in the flesh. The new law requires you to keep perpetual Sabbath, and you, because you are idle for one day, suppose that you are godly, not understanding why this has been commanded to you. If you eat unleavened bread, you say the will of God has been fulfilled. The Lord our God does not take pleasure in such observances. If there is any perjured person or thief among you, let him cease to be so; if any adulterer, let him repent. Then he has kept the sweet and true sabbaths of God. (Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew 12)
  • If we patiently endure all things contrived against us by wicked men and demons, so that even amid cruelties unutterable, death, and torments, we pray for the mercy for those who inflict such things upon us … even as the new Lawgiver commanded us, then how is it, Trypho, that we would not observe those rites that do not harm us—I speak of fleshly circumcision, Sabbaths, and feasts. (Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew 18)
  • For where it is said, “The Law of the Lord is perfect” [Ps 19:7] you do not understand it of the law which was to be after Moses, but of the law which was given by Moses, although God declared that he would establish a new law and a new covenant. (Dialogue with Trypho, a Jew 34)

Abolishing the Law

Jesus said in Matthew 5:17 that he did not come to abolish the Law. Yet these early Christians spoke of it being abolished: “He has therefore abolished these things” (Letter of Barnabs quote above).

It is not just those in the apostles’ churches who speak of the Law being abolished. It is in the Scriptures:

In that he says, “a new,” he has made the first old. Now that which decays and grows old is ready to disappear [aphanismos: disappearance, destruction]. (Heb. 8:13)

Okay, admittedly it’s not the exact same word that is used, but there is no doubt that the idea is the same. What Jesus said he did not come to do, the writer of Hebrews says is happening in his time.

What’s the problem? Is there a contradiction here?

Not at all. Jesus is speaking of the old and new law together. He did not come to simply throw the old law out. He came to fill up—or expand—it into what it was originally intended to be. Thus it did not actually disappear, except to our eyes. Instead, it grew up into something else, leaving its old form behind to decay, grow old, and disappear.

There are those today, necrophiliacs of the old law, that mourn over the decay and disappearance of the old, dead form. They want fleshly circumcision, and an idle seventh day. They reject the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ, the new Priest and new priesthood, which calls us to a spiritual and perpetual rest (one that we must labor to enter into—Heb. 4:11); they reject the words of Paul who told us not to let ourselves be judged concerning Sabbaths, new moons, and festivals, which are a mere shadow of Christ rather than Christ himself.

Jesus made himself clear. Those who want the commands of the Law of Moses to be forgotten and left behind will be called least in the kingdom of God (Matt. 5:19), but those who reject the new law, clinging to “you have heard it said” rather than to “but I say to you” are described as foolish and warned that the fall of their house will be great (Matt. 7:26-27).

We don’t have to wonder what Matthew 5:17-20 and the filling up of the Law of Moses means. Jesus told us in the rest of Matthew 5. Therefore, let us neither be necrophiliacs of the old form, living in commands meant for unregenerate citizens of a fleshly kingdom, nor let us be those who break the commands of God and teach others the same, ignorant of the fullness of the new law of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Posted in History, Modern Doctrines | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Fall of the Church?

Posted on 02/12/2013 by Paul Pavao

I got an email from someone that objects to my describing “the fall of the church.”

At least, I think that’s what his email was about. Sometimes it’s hard to tell. What I do know is that he offered several definitions of “the church” and he took guesses at what I meant by “the church.”

Anyway, this was my reply to that person:

You’ll see that my “Fall of the Church” posts are all stories.

Here’s the path:

  • 2nd century: awesome testimonies of righteousness and endurance in persecution.
  • 3rd century: More organization and hierarchy, more unrighteousness, less focus, more ritual, persecution produces a greater number of lapsed Christians.
  • 4th century: The churches, almost across the board, forget that they are supposed to be composed of disciples. The public flocks into the church, and the church is violent, worldly, and nothing at all like the pre-Constantinian churches. Influential church leadership positions are often appointed by the emperor or some government official, and corruption and intrigue are common. Monasteries form–in my opinion because committed Christians, with exceptions of course, find it impossible to be a part of the travesty that is called the church/churches.

That’s what I mean by the fall of the church. There are indeed true believers/sheep after that, even, in my opinion, true churches. I’m not trying to define the church in “fall of the church” but to tell the story that I roughly outline above.

I don’t understand why you say that Jesus said the organization would be identified by sheep and wolves together. That’s crazy. He talk about tares, but tares look like wheat. Wolves look like wolves, despite the Aesop’s fable about wolves in sheep’s clothing. Wolves should be driven away; that is the job of shepherds.

In fact, all the wicked should be put away so that we are a pure loaf. That is the command of the apostle Paul (1 Cor. 5).

Tares will slip through our imperfect discernment and our imperfect obedience to the apostle’s command, but if a church is noted for sheep and wolves together, it is a disobedient church that has probably already been spewed out of Jesus’ mouth (Rev. 3:16). Thus, in my opinion, it is no longer a church.

The issue is not definitions. It is actions and goals. Wasting one’s time with a group of people that are primarily nominal Christians is exactly that: a waste of time. No, worse, it is a testimony to the world that Jesus is meaningless and powerless. All disciples should leave such a church, and they should join with one another, not with those who have not even the intention of attempting to deny themselves, take up their cross daily, and follow Jesus.

Posted in Church, History | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

That the Body of Sin Might Be Done Away With

Posted on 02/10/2013 by Paul Pavao

The following is a daily devotional written by my father-in-law, Robert Maynard (no, not the former mayor of Oakland, CA). He calls it “Verse of the Day” and he sends it some co-workers and family, though he tells me he’s probably going to make it a blog soon.

I hope he does. This one is from February 8, day before yesterday. All the words and emphases are his, and this is used with permission. Once he makes his devotional a blog, I’ll give you a link:

Romans 6:6 NASB knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;

Daily Background reading: Romans 6:4-7

1. knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him: What do you know? How did you learn it? We know from the things we learn. We learn from experience, others experience or from just the plain facts of life. You can have book learning or life experiences learning (work knowledge). You know and I know that intelligence is not determined by either book knowledge or by life knowledge. Your intelligence is given to you by the Lord. There have been many, many people that have wanted to increase their IQ but have not been able. Why? That’s because only God can give you intelligence. But there is one area of intelligence that you can increase, your “faith intelligence.” You see it goes something like this. You come to faith in Christ. The Holy Spirit comes to live in you to guide and direct your life and to give you understanding in God’s ways. As you pray, read God’s holy word and place more of your faith in Him, you gain “faith intelligence” on what is right and wrong. You start to understand more and more how to please the Lord and to turn away from evil. That is why we call the men and women of Hebrews chapter 11 the “Heroes of Faith.” They are the wise ones of faith, the ones who have grown in their “faith intelligence” to the point of pleasing the Lord with their lives. And that is why the Bible says to us and God wants us to know:

Galatians 5:16 NASB But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.

2. in order that our body of sin might be done away with: Just because you know something doesn’t mean you will do it. Some things are dangerous but we take the “chance” and do them. We “weigh the odds” and place our bets, that we will beat the odds at whatever we want to do. What we often fail to do is properly assess the outcome if we “fail” to beat the odds. Let’s take the simple example of driving over the speed limit in your car. We say to ourselves “It’s ok because everyone is doing it” or we justify it by saying “I am late, and I must get there on time.” Whatever the reason or excuse, we choose to “take the chance” and speed. We calculate how fast we can go, for how long and what the chances are that no policeman will be up ahead of us. We even calculate “what are the odds” that if we do get stopped, we will get by with just a warning because we weren’t going that much over the speed limit. Remember one simple fact: Sin will cost you more than you want to pay, keep you longer than you expected to stay, and take more from you than you than you want to give. You see this verse teaches us that Sin is NOT automatically taken away from us. Paul uses the term might be in verse 4 and 6 to strengthen his point. He is writing under the inspiration of Almighty God and he is trying to let us know that the choice is ours. You have been crucified with Him so that the sin in your life might be done away with. We need to be just like Joshua when he says:

Joshua 24:15 NASB “If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.”

3. so that we would no longer be slaves to sin: Think about a slave for just a moment. He has no choice. He must do what he is told. But Praise the Lord, we are no longer slaves to sin. What does that mean? We now have a choice. We can choose whom we will serve in any and every situation. We can choose to serve ourselves and do the things that the flesh craves. That way is always the wrong way or the way of Sin. Or we can choose to serve the Lord and do things that the Spirit of God leads us to do. Notice that I say “leads us” not “forces us.” You “lead a horse” to water but you can’t “force him to drink.” So it is with us. God “leads us” in the path of righteousness not “forces us” in the path of righteousness. You my friend are a “freed slave.” Only do not use your freedom to sin but turn away from sin by the power of the Holy Spirit that is in you to guide you into the path of righteousness.

Lord, I want to practice what I say. I want to turn away from sin and do what is right in your sight. The only way I know to do that is to seek your guidance in every situation. As I pray unceasingly, enable me to know you will in every circumstance and situation. Help me to trust you more and more. Let me have spiritual eyes that can see and know what you see and know. I know that there are many deceivers out there and that the evil one often disguises himself as a child of light. Lord, help me to see through the deception and to be able to say to him “be gone Satan” “as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.”

Posted in Bible, Holiness | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Groanings Too Deep To Be Uttered

Posted on 02/09/2013 by Paul Pavao
In the same way, the Spirit also helps our weaknesses, for we do not know what to pray for like we should. However, the Spirit himself makes intercession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered. ~Romans 8:26

Yesterday I laid a foundation for this by discussing tongues for two reasons:

  1. A lot of people think this verse is about praying in tongues.
  2. What I have to say about this verse is related to praying in tongues.

Is Rom. 8:26 About Praying in Tongues?

Romans 8:26 talks about the Holy Spirit making intercession for us with “groanings too deep to be uttered.” Groanings too deep to be uttered are not the same as speaking in another language. “Too deep to be uttered” means, uh, “too deep to be uttered.” That means you can’t say those groanings.

Speaking in tongues is speaking in words. Groaning without uttering is not speaking at all.

This isn’t talking about praying in tongues.

Groanings Too Deep To Be Uttered

I spent yesterday’s post talking about words and Scripture verses. I just discussed the wording of Romans 8:26. Now, it is time to get to what I really want to point out, the imagery of Romans 8:26.

Picture what Paul is describing here. I am going to assume that it is not only the Holy Spirit that is groaning, but that the person in whom the Holy Spirit lives is groaning as well.

Picture this kind of prayer.

A person is on their knees, so caught up in prayer, that they are literally groaning, unable to express the deep—rich even—emotions that are moving in his or her spirit, prompted by the Holy Spirit, whose own infinite, completely unselfish love is longing for good to be poured out on the earth from God; whose own divine purity is agonizing over the impurity that we bring into God’s creation and our own society of his beloved children.

Do we pray like this?

I believe that many of us do not pray like this because we never create the opportunity to pray like this.

One of my favorite stories from Christian history is the arrest of Polycarp, the aged and beloved overseer of the church in Smyrna. Two soldiers showed up to arrest this dangerous enemy of Rome and were shocket to find a fragile, 86-year-old man with white hair and beard.

Polycarp served them a meal, then asked time to pray.

He then prayed … for two hours … out loud and in front of the soldiers.

We read of Jesus himself rising before daybreak to pour out his heart to his Father. We read of him crying out to his Father on the eve of his crucifixion to the point where he sweat drops of blood.

What kind of prayer is that?

Ecstasy

The gift of tongues is occasionally referred to by scholars as “ecstatic” tongues, especially in reference to the ancient tongues that we read about in the apostles writings.

TheFreeDictionary.com defines ecstatic as:

  1. In a trancelike state of great rapture or delight
  2. Being in a state of ecstasy; joyful or enraptured

I want to suggest that this “trancelike state of great rapture or delight” is promoted by the apostle Paul.

That’s probably not the best definition I could have used, but I had trouble finding a word as effective for communicating what I want to say as “ecstasy” is.

The problem is not “trancelike”; the problem is “rapture or delight” and “joyful.”

I don’t think that “groanings too deep to be uttered” are always, or ever, joyful or delightful. More probably, they can be painful, at least emotionally.

Paul was a much more wild man than we usually give him credit for. He was passionate, prone to anger, and impressively bold and hopeful. He was bold and hopeful because he was full of belief in the power of God.

But I wonder how much of his bold, hopeful fullness of faith was prompted by “watchings often.”

He mentions “watchings” in 2 Cor. 6:5 and 11:27. In 6:5 it is watchings and fasting. In 11:27 he adds “weariness and painfulness” and, again, “fasting often.”

What does Paul mean by “watching”?

He means staying up all night or late into the night in prayer. Not a few lines of requests for blessings, but long hours that he considered agonizing work.

When Paul mentions his difficulties and trials, he mentions false brothers, robbers, cold, nakedness, and “that which comes upon me daily, the care of all the churches.”

How did someone who had to walk everywhere he went care for all the churches?

He cared for them in prayer, which is why he could tell one church after another that he did not cease to pray for them, even since he saw them or even heard of them (Col. 1:3-4).

I’m going to risk a general statement here and say that no one who has spent long hours praying in care over the lost and over their brothers and sisters in Christ that they know or don’t know … anyone who has spent those long hours has had the experience of being “caught up,” whether in ecstasy or agony. They know the feeling of losing track of this world and being caught up into God, wrapped up in the Spirit of God, seeing things with an eternal view.

For Paul, this was definitely so. He was a man of visions and prophecies. In his prayers for the ship that was transporting him as a prisoner to Rome, which were surely long and full of emotional anguish, God promised him not only that he would survive, but that he would be granted the lives of all the crew members as well. (Toward the end of Acts, probably chapter 27. I’m in a hurry, so I’m not going to go look it up.)

Peter (Acts 10, I’m pretty sure) went to Joppa and was asked to pray for a woman named Dorcas, who had died. For us, that seems a little late to be praying, but Peter was an apostle.

Now Jesus was closer to God than even his lead disciple, Peter. Jesus could just walk into the room where Jairus’ daughter was and tell her to awake from the dead. Peter had to do more. When he was alone in the room with the dead woman, he prayed first, then asked Dorcas to get up.

I have to imagine that was an impassioned prayer. There were people outside counting on him. Can you imagine Peter emerging like a doctor from an operating room, head hung, pulling off his mask, and quietly announcing, “I’m sorry. I lost her.”

Peter didn’t want to imagine that, either. I assure you, he was crying out to God, and there were probably groans too deep to be uttered coming out of him.

Impassioned Prayers, Ecstasy, and Tongues

Let’s wander back to tongues. We read yesterday that Paul thanked God that he prayed with tongues more than all the Corinthians. He also prayed “with the understanding.” He sang, too, “with the spirit” and “with the understanding.”

I do not want to promote tongues. Overall, Paul didn’t, and no other apostles even mention it. You can search the writings of the early Christians, and there are a lot of them, and you will find only one passing reference from Irenaeus commenting that there were still those that spoke in tongues. It doesn’t sound like he even knew them.

Tongues showed up in the Book of Acts without any promotion. If they show up again, without any promotion or any kooky Christians asking us to say “abba” over and over again, then yeah!, I’m thrilled.

I do want to promote ecstasy, or at least that other worldly catching up that happens to those who labor before God for long periods of time.

It’s life-transforming, it’s Biblical, and both Jesus and the apostles gave us examples of it.

Maybe when we are people who can say with Paul that we are in watches and fasts, and that often, we will know again the proper role of tongues, or, even better, we will groan with intercessions too deep to be uttered rising from the Spirit of God to the throne of God.

The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man accomplishes much. ~James 5:16
Posted in prayer | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Groanings Too Deep To Be Uttered

Posted on 02/08/2013 by Paul Pavao
In the same way, the Spirit also helps our weaknesses, for we do not know what to pray for like we should. However, the Spirit himself makes interession for us with groanings that cannot be uttered. ~Romans 8:26

Let’s talk about tongues—meaning the spiritual ability to speak in a language you have not learned, whether anyone around you can understand the language or not.

I don’t think Romans 8:26 has anything at all to do with tongues, but we need to dispense with some controversial issues so that they don’t interfere with looking at what the Scripture has to say about prayer in this verse. Tradition—meaning beliefs that we got from our denomination, parents, or some other source to which we are emotionally bonded—can entirely steal our ability to interpret even the most obvious, straightforward teachings of the Bible.

And speaking and praying in tongues is an emotional issue these days, not as much as 30 to 50 years ago, but still an emotional issue.

I have a friend and mentor who, I’m pretty certain, believes that tongues have passed away because of 1 Cor. 13. He’s brought it up with me at least two or three times, and I always just tell him I don’t agree, then avoid discussing the issue.

The point of that comment is that even I, Mr. Theological Controversy, avoid arguing this topic, even with close friends.

Simply put, I think that, in regard to the interpretation of Scripture, tongues is a muddy enough issue that it has to be resolved on a practical, experiential basis, not a theoretical one.

Let me explain.

Tongues in Acts

The Book of Acts is often used to argue about the role of tongues in the church today. It is important that we remember that this is the issue. What about today? Should we be speaking and praying in tongues? Is there spiritual edification for us or for the body in praying in tongues, or has it ceased, as 1 Cor. 13:8 says it will at some point.

Despite the fact that the Book of Acts talks about tongues more than any other book of the Bible, it is, in my opinion, useless for determining anything about what we ought to do today.

The reason is that nothing is said about tongues in the Book of Acts that is doctrinal or theological. We are simply told that it happened. We are given no instructions, no reasons, no guide for the future.

I think the one thing we can all agree on concerning tongues in the Book of Acts is that it happened often, it happened at conversion, it’s never mentioned outside of conversion, and it seems to have happened to every convert present.

I would add that we can all agree that it always happened when some new group of people came into the church, but I think it’s really a stretch to suggest that the disciples of John in Acts 19:1-6 are a new group of people.

The others are:

  • The Jews on the day of Pentecost, represented by the apostles (Acts 2:1-4)
  • The Gentiles under the preaching of Peter (Acts 10:45-46)
  • Possibly the Samaritans under the preaching of Philip and the laying on of hands of Peter and John (Acts 8:14-18)

Tongues in 1 Corinthians

The only other place that tongues is mentioned is in 1 Corinthians 12-14. There we find some definitive guidance on the use of tongues in the church and in our private prayer life.

I keep using “tongues is” rather than “tongues are” because I’m talking about the gift of tongues. “Languages” would be a better translation than tongues, but we’re all used to using “tongues,” so, contrary to my normal manner, I’m sticking to convention.

Corinthians tells us:

  • Not everyone has the gift of tongues (1 Cor. 12:30)
  • Interpretation of tongues is also a spiritual gift (1 Cor. 12:30)
  • Tongues without love is useless (1 Cor. 13:1)
  • That tongues will stop when “that which is complete” comes (1 Cor. 13:8), as will prophecy and the gift of knowledge
  • That praying in tongues builds up the person praying, but not the church (1 Cor. 14:4)
  • Unless the tongues are interpreted (1 Cor. 14:5)
  • If we speak in tongues, we should pray that we can interpret (1 Cor. 14:13)
  • If you bless food in public in tongues, you are giving thanks well, but you shouldn’t do that because no one else can understand you (1 Cor. 14:16-17)
  • Paul prays and sings in tongues (1 Cor. 14:15)
  • Paul doesn’t understand what he’s praying or singing (1 Cor. 14:14)
  • Paul speaks in tongues more than any of the Corinthians (1 Cor. 14:18)
  • And he thanks God for that! (1 Cor. 14:18)
  • Paul doesn’t speak or pray in tongues in the church (1 Cor. 14:19)

Summing Up the Scriptures on Tongues

What does that say for us today?

Honestly? I don’t know. Here’s the problem.

Whom do you know that speaks in tongues and that spoke in tongues spontaneously, without instruction or being told that they should speak in tongues?

One person? Two?

I attended and diligently participated in Pentecostal and charismatic churches for eight years. I read books about the history of the Pentecostal movement written by Pentecostals. I read everything that Kenneth Hagin, Kenneth Copeland, T.L. Osborne, and several others wrote.

My experience?

Almost no one in the modern era has ever spoken in tongues without coaching. There are a few rare exceptions, but they are very rare.

I think it is undeniable that this is not what happened in the Book of Acts.

Were the apostles coached on speaking tongues before the Spirit fell on them? How about Cornelius? Did Peter really interrupt his sermon about Jesus to mention that real Christians speak in tongues, but Luke forgot to mention it?

No, in the Book of Acts, men and women spoke in tongues as the Spirit fell on them—spontaneously, without coaching.

That simply doesn’t happen today. Or if it does, it happens so rarely that I have never heard of it despite being on the mission field with Pentecostal missionaries and extensive experience in Pentecostal and Charismatic churches and literature.

I heard of one well-known ministry (a husband-wife team, I forget their names) that sat people down and had them say “abba” over and over until they “spoke in tongues.”

I’m sorry, that’s not the New Covenant’s gift of tongues. It is babbling.

Look up “travesty.” It’s an interesting word. What that ministry was doing is a “travesty” of tongues, not tongues itself.

Conclusion

I have to go to a prayer meeting. I’m late. I’ll give you a conclusion tomorrow.

There is a good, practical approach to tongues in the modern era, and the secret to it is locked up in Romans 8:26.

Posted in Modern Doctrines | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Questions About Salvation

Posted on 02/04/2013 by Paul Pavao

This is an email I wrote this morning. I think it’s anonymous enough to post publicly.

1. What does “saved” mean to me?

“Saved” is a big word that means different things in different context. In Romans 5:9-10 for example, “saved” is used in a future tense in reference to the judgment, being “saved from wrath.”

In that particular passage, our “past tense” salvation–when we were born again, forgiven, and brought into the life of Christ–is referred to as being “justified.” However, in Eph. 2:8, “saved” is a reference to the exact same thing that is called “justified” in Rom. 5:9-10.

Let me give you a three-part picture. Every part can be called salvation, and the whole process can be called salvation, too. But each step has its own terminology that never varies, at least in Paul’s letters:

Stage 1: justification, born again, new creation – Jesus died for us, so that we could believe and obtain grace and have our past sins forgiven. Grace is the power of God to overcome sin and live spiritually, which is simply the power of the Holy Spirit in us. We have grace because we have the Holy Spirit. Grace is spiritual power (Rom. 6:14; Tit. 2:11-12; 1 Pet. 4:10-11). Our previous sins are all forgiven here, and we die to our old life. We start a new life, and everything previous is forgiven and forgotten.

Stage 2: We live for Jesus on this earth by the power of the Spirit. Paul referred to this stage as “saved by his life” in Rom. 5:9-10. The picture of living on earth is spelled out in Romans 8 especially, but I like Galatians better. I love this picture, “Nevertheless I live, yet not I, but Christ lives in me. The life that I live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God” (Gal. 2:20).

When Paul talks about Jesus’ death (and I think other NT writers, too) to Christians in this stage, he speaks about what Jesus did for us in the past. Jesus’ death is what allows us to be forgiven and born again. We don’t live by Jesus’ death. We live by Jesus’ life, which is no different than living by grace or living by the Spirit.

Since you’re asking such specific questions, let me add that we still need daily forgiveness, which comes by Jesus’ blood. “If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ, his Son, cleanses us from every sin” (1 Jn. 1:7).

However, you should read “cleanse” correctly. The verse I just quoted is 1 John 1:7. Two verses later, in 1:9, John distinguishes between forgiveness and cleansing. We need both. The hymn “Rock of Ages” says it well, “Let the water and the blood, from the wounded side which flowed, be for sin the double cure, cleanse from guilt and make me pure.” The song uses “cleanse” for the forgiving part of Jesus’ death, while John uses “cleanse” for the deliverance part of Jesus’ blood, but the idea is the same even if the terminology is slightly different.

Stage 3: This is the judgment. It is possible to appear before the judgment blameless and without fault. In fact, that’s the plan. If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, that should be what we face at the judgment because Jesus’ blood will have been cleansing us daily.

But let’s not be fooled. If you want to have the righteousness of Jesus at the judgement, you had better be living in righteousness. John could not say it more plainly than he does in 1 Jn. 3:7-8: “Do not be deceived, he who practices righteousness is righteous as he is righteous. He who practices sin is of the devil.”

The judgment will be according to works. Nothing else. You can read about the judgment in Matt. 25 and Rev. 20, and there are numerous comments about it in the apostolic writings (2 Cor. 5:10; 1 Pet. 1:17; Rom. 2:5-8, etc.). Christians don’t get an easier judgment. They get the same judgment the world gets. There are not two judgments. The 2-judgment theory is a fantasy created by people who refuse to believe that Christians are judged by their works.

This is stage 3. If you live by his life, then you will be saved from wrath at the judgment. If you don’t, then you will be condemned with the world.

2. Where does grace come from?

Have I already answered this above, like I hope?

3. How is Jesus’ death “for us”?

Christians today get so stuck on the penal substitution theory of the atonement, even though it was just invented 700 years ago, that they can’t really conceive of anything else. “For us” gets to meaning “in our place.” The Scriptures don’t really use that terminology.

A person can die for me by being my substitute in a trial, though I doubt that has ever happened or that any judge would allow it to happen. A person can also die for me by throwing himself on a grenade next to me. “For me” means I benefit from it.

The benefits we receive from Christ’s death are so great and so many that of course we can say he died “for us.” His death, according to Scripture, was a “ransom” and a “purchase” and a “redemption.” Who gets redeemed, purchased, or ransomed, and to whom is the redemption money, purchase price, or ransom paid? Slaves and captives are redeemed, purchased, or ransomed, and the price for the redemption, purchase, or ransom is paid to the captor or slave owner, not to the Father.

Our Father God paid the price for us. He paid with his only Son to redeem us from slavery. Jesus didn’t pay a price to God so God wouldn’t be mad. God already loved us, “while we were yet sinners” (Rom. 5:8). Nor was the blood brought to our slavemaster, satan. Instead, Jesus’ himself was given into the hands of satan. He was exchanged for us. We were set free from satan’s hold.

But it didn’t stop there. Satan didn’t know what he was getting into. He thought he had Jesus all wrapped up in the chains of death. Had he known that Jesus was going to shatter the chains of death forever, he never would have crucified the Lord of glory.

Jesus came roaring out of death, leading forth a host of captives, ending satan’s reign for all who would come to him. He gives his Spirit to all who believe, transforming them from mere humans into sons of God who house the very life of God and partake of his divine nature.

Jesus did all that “for us.”

4. What about baptism for the remission of sins?

You asked how this “fits into your points.” Um, I don’t know. I didn’t go back and look at the original Sola Fide article, so I’m not sure how baptism came up. I would likely have talked about it because it’s supposed to be the place where you acknowledge your belief, are buried with Christ, rise to new life, and receive the Spirit of God.

5. What is the point of having our sins forgiven, especially if it doesn’t lead to eternal life?

Wow. It’s amazing how brainwashed we modern Christians can get. So if I say that Jesus didn’t “pay the penalty” by suffering a death penalty in our place, then I said that forgiveness of sins doesn’t lead to eternal life???

I said no such thing. Of course forgiveness of sins has to do with eternal life. Sins were going to keep us from eternal life (Eph. 5:6). Jesus’ death brought both forgiveness of sins and deliverance from sin.

6. What does it mean to believe in Christ or have faith in Christ? Is it to believe that he is the Lord, the great I AM, the Messiah? That he’s the final judge? Something else?

I’m sorry for marveling. I would have asked questions like this, too, I think. However, no one who has not been showered with evangelical narrow-mindedness could even ask such a question.

Believing in Christ means believing in Christ. It’s not a reference to believing anything *about* Christ, that he’s this or that he’s that. It’s a reference to believing in him. Become his disciple, do what he says, believe everything he says, follow him.

Believe it or not, if you’re not brainwashed by weird Christian thinking, that’s what believing in someone will automatically mean to you. If I told you I believed in Hulk Hogan, you would expect to find me learning whatever Hogan teaches, living like him, and talking about his life and ways.

Unless we’re Christian, we all know that is what believing in a person means in Greek, English, German, Hebrew, or Pig Latin.

7. My case seems much stronger in the letters of Paul than in John.

The opposite is true. My case is stronger in John. Have you ever read 1 John? Consider these verses:

“Do not be deceived, he who practices righteousness is righteous as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil.”

“He who says, ‘I know him,” and does not keep his commandments is a liar and the truth is not in him.”

“This is how that we know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.”

I focus on Paul in my writings on salvation by faith because evangelicals make their case primarily from Romans, Galatians, and Ephesians. I use those letters primarily, and that is because I want to show that even Martin Luther’s great “faith” epistles don’t teach salvation by faith alone the way the evangelicals do.

Just so you know, from my perspective, I have to work at understanding even why you would reference Acts 13:48 as though it were relevant to our discussion. “As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” What do you think that means? Are you suggesting that if that verse is true, then there is no judgment by works for us? Are you suggesting that verse says that all our sins are forgiven, even future ones? Are you suggesting that verse says that anyone who believes [believes what?] has eternal life no matter what they do?

I am simply astounded that anyone would suggest that “as many as were ordained to eternal life believed” somehow contradicts anything I’ve been saying. How much interpretation and “reading into” are you putting into those 9 words???

1 John 5:11 is worse. “God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son?”

Oh, wait. Maybe I’m starting to get it. You’re saying that this verse must mean that we have “eternal” life, so now that we have it, we must go to heaven because we have life “eternally.” It can’t go away.

Okay, that at least helps me understand where you’re coming from.

Here’s my answer. That interpretation contradicts all sorts of verses, makes a mess of the apostles writings, and it’s only one possible interpretation.

Here’s a better one. It is the life that is eternal, not our possession of it. That verse says we have eternal life, not that we have life eternally. “Eternally” would be an adverb. It would describe a verb, and thus it would mean that our possession of life is eternal. However, “eternal” is an adjective. It describes the noun, life. The life is eternal, not our possession of it.

1 John 5:11 is talking about eternal life rather than our physical, temporary life. Not only is that life in the Son, as 1 John 5:11 says, but Jesus actually *is* that life, according to the start of 1 John. At the beginning of the letter, John tells us that he and the other apostles handled and saw eternal life. It came down and lived with us. Jesus is eternal life.

So yes, as long as we have the Son living in us, we have eternal life. If the Son departs from us, we no longer have eternal life, because “that life is in his Son.”

Take heart, though! Immortality is a reward of the judgment (Rom. 2:7). If you continue faithful to the end and overcome, then eternal life will be in you as well as in the Son. Then you will confidently possess eternal life eternally.

Let me add a question you didn’t ask:

8. How do we have assurance that we will go to heaven?

We don’t and we are repeatedly warned not to think we do. Peter tells us to fear because there is a judgment according to works, without partiality, coming to all of us (1 Pet. 1:17). Paul uses the example of the Israelites in the wilderness, who were baptized into Moses and had Christ with them, to tell the one who “thinks he stands” to “take heed, lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:1-12). John tells us that if we want to have assurance, then we need to love in deed and truth rather than in word and tongue. This will assure our hearts before him (1 Jn. 3:18-19). Jesus’ whole point in Matthew 7:21-23 is to snap us out of our assurance and make us afraid to be “workers of iniquity.”

And is it really possible to miss that 1 Cor. 6:9-11, which tells us not to be deceived, and Gal. 5:19-21, which tells us that Paul felt it necessary to warn his hearers repeatedly, and Eph. 5:5-7, which again tells us not to be deceived … is it really possible to miss that all these are warning Christians not to be fooled into thinking that they just have a guarantee of heaven?

I’m sorry, but a person who can’t tell that is what those verses are saying isn’t even trying. He’s just defending tradition, playing silly games. Such a person is not trying to find out what God, through Paul, is saying.

I apologize if any of my “marveling out loud” was offensive to you. It’s just that the ability of evangelicals to refuse to consider any alternative way of looking at any of their favorite verses is amazing.

Posted in Bible, Gospel, Modern Doctrines | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

The Council at Jerusalem

Posted on 02/03/2013 by Paul Pavao

I’m not going to talk about the council at Jerusalem. I’m going to pass on an article about it. I’m quoted in it, though only as admitting I really didn’t know why the council chose those four laws to put on the Gentiles.

The following article, however, explains it perfectly. Pay special attention to the part about Leviticus 17, which is the last section.

Restless Pilgrim on the Jerusalem Guidelines

Posted in Bible, Miscellaneous | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Leukemia in the Body of Christ

Posted on 02/02/2013 by Paul Pavao

I apparently stopped being notified by email of comments on this blog. I had a couple that sat for a few days before being approved. Sorry.

This is an email I wrote to someone. This is now in the “thinking out loud” stage. I’ve been through the “thinking quietly and talking only to close friends” stage for over a year. So this is the best stage to jump all over me if you’re offended by this, even though I’ve thought about it a while. At the moment, I’m still holding it before God, but I’m confident enough to say this out where anyone can hear it.

This is directed at professed Christians:

Leukemia in the Body of Christ

I had leukemia last year. Chemo, radiation, and a stem cell transplant have put it into remission, hopefully permanently. Leukemia, however, painted a really clear picture for me of a problem in the body of Christ.

Leukemia is a cancer. All it takes is for one cell to go bad, then survive. That one blood cell does not finish its development. It gets stuck along the way as an “adolescent,” not grown into it’s proper role. It then reproduces and reproduces.

It reproduces and reproduces, always clones of itself, and it and its clones do not know how to die. All our other cells are programmed to die when they are not functioning correctly or when they are overcrowded. Not cancer cells. They just keep multiplying until they crowd out all the other cells.

In other words, these cloned cells stop all the blood cells from doing their job, and they don’t fulfill their own role, either.

The church is like that today, and the leukemia cells are pastors.

Yeah, I really said that.

They have multiplied out of control, and they don’t know how to stop. They don’t quit, even if they are not doing the job God made them for, and even if their work is actually damaging to the church.

Leukemia cells crowd out other cells by sheer number. Pastors crowd out other gifts by the role they play rather than by numbers. Rather than training the saints so that the saints do the work of ministry (Eph. 4:11-12), they try to do it all themselves. The body of Christ is reduced to one big mouth with no other parts functioning.

That’s an exaggeration, but the picture is correct.

Worse, the pastors are not fulfilling their Scriptural function, but a new, false (cancerous) function. Some are evangelists, evangelizing the supposed church, preaching salvation messages to the same crowd every week.

Actually, they preach soteriology, the doctrine of salvation, confusing it for the Gospel. I thought I wrote a recent post on this, but I guess I didn’t. I did write a booklet on it. I’ll condense it and make it a post in the next few days.

Some are trying to do the work of shepherding, but most know little to nothing about real church life and the need for and power of unity. In fact, most vastly underestimate the importance of obedience to Christ understanding neither salvation nor grace nor the judgment.

Since they are qualified in the wrong way—by theological training at a seminary, college, or Bible school rather than by established character lived out before the church throughout their lives—it is no surprise that they function in the wrong way, teaching Christians to pursue the wrong goals.

Not everywhere is like that. There are exceptions. House churches are multiplying. Unique expressions of modern church arise more quickly than ever.

Nonetheless, the primary model of Christianity being displayed in the western world—and in the third world, for that matter, where we’ve transported our cancer—is a pastor-centered model that cannot be found in the Scriptures. In it the church is a building, and the center of church life is not the unity and love of the saints, but a couple meetings held at the church (meaning the building) every week, where a song leader, a group of money collectors, and a pastor are the only members functioning.

Leukemia. The body of Christ has leukemia, and the leukemic cells are pastors.

The cancer has not completely taken over, but it is very, very advanced. Kudos to the many who are fighting against it, but I hope you are going to step back and let God create the new blood system rather than building a new cancer into the work you are doing.

Treating Leukemia

What the hospital did for me when I had leukemia was destroy my entire blood system so that it could be built over again from scratch.

Hmm.

I had acute leukemia, though. Acute leukemia advances so aggressively that the patient usually has only weeks to live once it is diagnosed. My leukemia was found about six weeks before I would have died.

Chronic leukemia moves slower. Doctors don’t treat chronic leukemia like acute leukemia. Destroying a blood system and starting over kills a lot of patients.

If you have Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML), about 75% of patients either can’t get or don’t survive the treatment.

What I had was worse, but the treatment was the same as the strongest AML regimen available.

From a nurse: “Wow. This is a big dose! Are they really giving you eight of those?”

Me: “Uh, no. They’re giving me twelve.”

The nurse left the room without comment.

Since patients can survive chronic leukemia for a long time, it’s better to give those patients safer treatment. Most chronic leukemia sufferers stay on a single pill dose of chemotherapy all their lives, and they’re never quite completely healthy and sometimes very, very sick.

I’m not going to explain that illustration. I’m just going back to thinking about it. I just wanted to let you chew on it with me.

Posted in Church, Gospel, Leadership, Leukemia | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments