The New Testament tells that Paul’s missionary vision was concentrated on serving the Gentiles. Being a strong enemy of Christianity, Paul became one of the greatest miracles of the New Testament and thus his life was a true representation of what a real mission is. There are several characteristics of missionary methods Paul uses in his service.

The first method that can be recognized is the so-called itinerant evangelism which lies in spreading the good news in every place on Earth. In other words, Paul “[calls] people everywhere in the then known world to repent and give themselves to Christ” (Moreau, Corwin, and McGee 2004). The accent is put on the fact that the Gospel is spread by Paul not in the place of his usual inhabitance but in the places, he would even never visit if it were not for God’s calling in his life. This method should be well understood by each Christian because often Church sees evangelism only locally. Paul provides a good method of making God’s will be done since the main commission consists in spreading the Gospel to the ends of the Earth. Paul’s method went beyond all borders of the average human mind- he committed himself to go anywhere God would send him, whatever it cost him. Another important method used by Paul in his evangelism is following the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. It is evident from the Scriptures that Paul was led by Holy Spirit in every decision he made. It even turned out sometimes that the places he wanted to visit were not part of God’s plan so he successfully avoided traveling there. Thus, “in a blend of Spirit-led decisions and divine revelations, Paul moves from one city to another” (Moreau, Corwin and McGee 2004). Of course, since mission is God’s will first, and each missionary should follow this rule, but Paul’s life is a true example of how missionaries should accomplish their calling in preaching the Gospel to the ends of the Earth.

The next characteristic of Paul’s missionary methods that may be traced from the life of Paul is total fearlessness. Paul did not appreciate his earthly life at all but considered God’s mission to be the main purpose. It is clear that Paul’s mission consisted in fulfilling God’s will even at the cost of his own life, and his daring heart allowed him to return to places full of danger. Therefore, “modern Christians may wonder what Paul’s feelings were as he returned to Lystra, where recently he had been stoned and left for dead…” but this seems to be “a nonissue” for Paul as he was straight-out for mission (Moreau, Corwin and McGee 2004). Paul’s methods were radical enough: he exposed people’s sins and also was not afraid to die for the truth. One more important characteristic of Paul’s missionary methods is that he never left those he converted to Christianity without spiritual help and support. To be more precise, despite his calling consisted of going to the nations and spreading the Gospel to the ends of the Earth, he still considered it important to support the planted churches. He does this in the face of persecutions and tries to fulfill his promise to visit the churches at all costs, though still, he is every time led by the Holy Spirit.

The last characteristic is presenting Gospel to all people, regardless of their background. Paul “was willing to adapt in different places a radically different approach, as he put it, “for those under the law and for those not under the law” (Winter and Hawthorne 1981). This was one of the most crucial characteristics of Paul’s mission because it triggered many contradictions among the Jewish people and Pharisees. His message was as contradictory and difficult to accept as the message of Jesus Christ. This is the testimony of Paul’s true devotion to the teaching of Christ. As His disciple, Paul followed the main principle Jesus Christ used: God loved the world and wants every human being to be saved. All in all, Paul’s missionary methods fully express the essence of the Gospel: God’s love to people at all cost.

References

Moreau, A. Scott, Gary Corwin, and Gary B McGee. 2004. Introducing World Missions. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic.

Winter, Ralph D and Steven C Hawthorne. 1981. Perspectives on The World Christian Movement: Reader. Pasadena, Calif.: William Carey Library.

The post Paul’s Missionary Methods appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

Mary, the mother of Jesus, is one of the most significant characters in the New Testament. For her humility and obedience to God, Mary has been admired by generations of Christians throughout history. The character of Mary has also been widely covered in Western art, literature, and music. Based on the New Testament’s depiction of her, Christians and theologians across the world have over time constructed a largely admirable picture of Mary. Interestingly, biblical references to Mary are too sparse and few especially considering her character and significance. Because of this, the current paper presents a biographical study of Mary with an aim to shedding more light on her character, early life, and significance to Christianity. In addition to the New Testament, the paper relies on established scholarly sources for the necessary literature.

Background Information and Early Life

According to some scholars, Mary was a descendant of David and this ensured that ancient prophecy over the lineage of Jesus was fulfilled through her being the mother of Jesus. This supposition is, however, based on Luke’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus through Mary. Matthew’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus is different from that of Luke as the former traces this lineage through Solomon while the latter traces it through Nathan[1]. Although other scholars interpret that Luke was tracing Mary’s lineage, he was tracing that of Joseph. When viewed in this context, it is difficult to ascertain whether Mary was a descendant of David. It is, however, clear that Jesus was a descendant of David since there is Biblical evidence that Joseph was from David’s lineage[2].

The most comprehensive biblical references of Mary’s early life are in the books of Luke and James. According to the Gospel of James, Mary was the daughter of Joachim and Anna. Joachim was very wealthy and always gave a double offering to the Lord. Despite his generosity and commitment to offerings, Joachim and Anna stayed for long without having children. When a man by the name of Reubel reminded him that he had not yet conceived a child, Joachim became particularly frustrated and moved to the desert where he fasted and prayed until the Lord heard his prayer. When describing the child that she would give birth to, the angel of the Lord told Anna that the child would be famous and be spoken of everywhere[3].

When Mary turned three, her parents took her to the temple where she received food from an angel. Mary served in the temple until she was twelve. When she reached this age, the Lord instructed Zachariah on how he would get a husband for Mary. The Lord told Zachariah to gather widowers so that the Lord would give Mary to one of them as his wife. When Zachariah did as the Lord had instructed him, Joseph was anointed as the one to take Mary as his wife. And although he declined at first, Joseph agreed to take her after considering the potential wrath that would result from disobeying God.

While at Joseph’s house, an angel appeared and confirmed to her that she would conceive of the Lord. At first, Mary appeared shocked by the idea of conceiving a child from the Lord God. The angel, however, explained to her that the power of God would get her pregnant and that the child she would give birth to would save people from their sins. It was only after this clarification that Mary agreed to the prophecy of the angel. The visit of the angel is regarded as one of the most important events in the early life of Mary as it was during this time that Mary understood God’s plans for her[4].

The Character of Mary

The earliest reference to the character of Mary is found in the book of Galatians. In the fourth chapter of this book, the phrase “born of woman” is used. In contemporary theology, some scholars regard the phrase as an allusion to Mary while others regard it as a reference to the essential humanity of an individual. When applied to Mary, the phrase “born of woman” was meant to portray Jesus as completely human[5]. Considering that at least one parent was needed for a child to be considered human in the ancient world, Mary played a particularly important role in the depiction of Jesus as a man and human. The phrase could also be taken to mean that Jesus’ birth would not be conventional as it would involve a woman only rather than a woman and a man[6].

According to some scholars, the phrases “born of woman” as used in the Bible and “born of the Virgin Mary” as used in the Apostles Creed have a similar significance and purpose when used to refer to Jesus the son of Mary. When used in this context, the two phrases highlight that Mary’s role as the mother of Jesus was the most important of her life. In this regard, this role takes precedence over all other roles played by Mary throughout her life. Despite this seemingly acceptable interpretation, the concept of a virgin birth as advanced by Catholicism has been notably divisive among scholars. According to opponents, the concept of a virgin birth is not consistent with the fact that Jesus was a human being born of a human mother. Proponents of the concept, on the other hand, argue that a virgin birth was enabled by Mary’s acceptance of the role of facilitating the process of incarnation.

Although most references to Mary’s pregnancy in the Old Testament assert that she conceived without any human agency, certain texts could be interpreted to suggest otherwise. In Matthew 1:16 for instance, the phrase “Joseph begat Jesus” has been used by some scholars to question whether Mary conceived without any human agency[7]. Interestingly, references to the topic of how Mary conceived are only found in the books of Matthew and Luke. This makes it particularly difficult for scholars to make conclusions on the topic with any degree of certainty. Despite this, most Protestant churches continue to teach that Mary’s virginity was not impaired when she conceived Jesus[8].

The question over whether Mary was genetically connected to her son Jesus has been equally divisive throughout history. When analyzing the issue, it is important to first acknowledge that the sinful nature of our first parents has always been passed from one generation to the other. In this regard, similar to all other human beings, Mary had sinned since she was genetically related to Adam and Eve. Her son Jesus, however, was an exception as He did not have an inherited sin nature. When placed in this context, it could be argued that Mary did not have a genetic connection with her son since Jesus was sinless[9]. The book of Hebrews ascertains this proposition by referring to Jesus as a special creation of God that was placed in Mary’s womb (Hebrew 10:5…). This Biblical reference could also be used as evidence for the proposition that Mary conceived without any human agency. Had she conceived otherwise, Jesus would have inherited a sinful nature.

During the period after Jesus’ baptism, Mary experienced a rather unfortunate time with her son Jesus. When Jesus started to spread the Gospel, Mary joined her other sons in regarding Jesus as crazy. Subsequently, Jesus appeared to disown them when He refused to go meet His family who had come over at one of His meetings.

“Who are my mother and brothers?” He asked. Then he looked round at those seated in a circle around Him and said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.” (Mark 3:33-35)[10].

The above incident marked the start of a difficult period for Mary. The fallout between Mary and her son Jesus continued when Jesus appeared to refer to Mary as far from blessed. The incident in which these events happened also marked the first worshipper of Mary recorded in the Bible. While reacting to one of Jesus’ teaching sessions, a woman amongst a crowd called out to Jesus and said “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you (Luke 11:27).” Jesus responded to this statement by asserting that those who hear the word of God and heed to it are the ones blessed.

The response from Jesus appeared to indicate the strained relationships in Mary’s family. Mary and her other sons had joined hands in regarding Jesus as crazy after He had refused to meet them. On the other hand, Jesus had responded by terming those interested in seeking the word of God as more important than His family. Mary’s experiences during Jesus’ ministry could also be used to highlight the difficulties that face families when there lacks a deep knowledge of the Gospel. Having known the role that Jesus would play in the salvation of mankind from the day the angel of the Lord visited her, Mary should have led her sons in supporting Jesus’ ministry.

Mary’s suffering during Jesus’ lifetime had been prophesied by Simeon. When the aged prophet met baby Jesus at the temple, he prophesied that Mary would suffer and experience pain in the course of Jesus’ ministry:

“This child is destined to cause the falling and rising of many in Israel and to be a sign that is spoken against. –yes, a sword will pierce your own soul too – so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed” (Luke 2:34-35)[11].

The prophecy that Mary’s soul would be pierced by a sword was fulfilled through her rather strained relationship with Jesus and His ministry. The prophecy could also be seen to have been fulfilled at the foot of the cross where Mary wept following her son’s crucifixion. The thoughts of Mary’s heart could also be seen to have been revealed through Jesus’ ministry. Although Mary “fell” when she listened to her sons, she later realized her mistake and accepted Jesus. In this regard, the thoughts of her heart were revealed.

Although Mary did not follow Jesus as He traveled and preached throughout Israel, her presence when He was arrested in Jerusalem underlines her love for her son. In the company of Jesus’ aunt, Mary was present throughout Jesus’ judgment process and witnessed His crucifixion at Golgotha. There is Biblical evidence indicating that Jesus reciprocated this love. While at the cross, Jesus reciprocated the love His mother had shown Him:

“Near the cross of Jesus stood His mother, His mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus saw His mother there, and the disciple whom He loved (John) standing nearby He said to His mother, “Dear woman, here is your son,” and to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time on, this disciple took her into his home.” (John19:25-27)[12].

The Baptism of Mary

There is no Biblical reference to the baptism of Mary. Considering that Jesus had ordered all Christians to be baptized, however, it is particularly difficult to believe that Mary was not baptized. Like her mother, Mary was likely among the first Christians to be baptized by immersion as Jesus had instructed all Christians to do. As earlier indicated, however, there lacks a Biblical account of Mary’s baptism and as such, there is little that can be evaluated about the process.

The Death of Mary

Similar to her baptism, the Bible does not account for Mary’s death. According to some church records, John took Mary with him to Ephesus where she died and got buried. Largely due to the lack of credible evidence, the topic of Mary’s death remains divisive among scholars and the various church dominations.  The ‘Assumption of Mary’ is arguably one of the most renowned legends regarding the death of Mary. According to this account, Mary’s ascended to heaven in a similar manner as Jesus[13]. And while this account is popular in Christianity, it is critical to note that Biblical evidence opposes this supposition.

The Gospel of John’s declaration that “no man has ascended to heaven” could be used as evidence that Mary did not ascend to heaven as Jesus did[14]. It is hard to believe that John, who took care of Mary, would have declared that no one had descended to heaven had Mary did so. By the time John wrote the book, Mary was well over 100 years. Equally, it is hard to believe that Mary was still alive by the time John wrote the book. Apostle Paul also says that every human being shall be made alive on the day of resurrection each in their order. Considering that Mary was in every aspect a human being, it could be argued that she belongs among those who will be resurrected by Jesus and given eternal life[15].

Based on the above discussion of Mary’s death, it could also be conclusively asserted that Mary is not in heaven. This brings up an equally divisive topic over whether Christians should pray to her. According to available evidence, Mary did not rise to heaven and is sleeping in the dust with others waiting for the resurrection day[16]. In this regard, it could be regarded as wrong to pray to her since she cannot hear prayers. Praying to Mary further breaks one of God’s commandments that prohibit Christians from consulting the dead. Christians should consult God only.

The Lord’s Prayer as taught by Jesus to His disciples provides further evidence that Christians should not address their prayers to anyone else other than God. According to Jesus’ teachings, Christians should address their prayers to their “Father who art in Heaven”. When placed in this context, it is critical to note that Jesus did not instruct Christians to pray to Him[17]. There is no Biblical evidence indicating that prayers should be addressed to anyone else other than God. And although Christians can pray to God through Jesus, the same cannot be said of Mary[18].

Mary and the Book of Revelation

Some scholars have interpreted some symbols in the book of Revelation as referring to Mary. The book of revelation refers to a woman clothed with the sun and who appears to give birth to a son. According to some scholars, the woman referred to by this symbol is Mary. And although it is particularly difficult to ascertain whether that woman is Mary, it is important to refer to several Biblical phrases that could relate to the topic. Firstly, there appears to be a common acceptance that the son of the woman referred to in the book of Revelation is Jesus. When comparing the woman mentioned in Revelation with that mentioned in Genesis, it could be noted that this woman is probably faithful to Israel.

Further Biblical evidence indicates that this woman later became the spiritual mother of the church at Jerusalem. Following the ascension of the son of a woman, this woman was persecuted and this made her flee to the wilderness. When viewed from this point, it is more likely that the woman mentioned in the book of Revelation is the Israel faithful such as Jesus’ disciples and not Mary the mother of Jesus. This interpretation should, however, be taken as one of the many possible interpretations that can be made of the woman mentioned in Revelation.

Significance of Mary to Modern Christianity

Over the years, some scholars and Christianity faithful have advanced the belief that Mary is mother to the world. According to this supposition, Mary is an example of godly motherhood, and as such Christians are obliged to regard Mary as their mother. While addressing his audience during a mass at Saint Peter’s Square, Pope Francis once referred to Mary as the mother of Christians. According to the Pope, those who do not share this feeling ought to regard themselves as orphans. Expectedly, some scholars took issue with this statement as it seemed to violate the Scripture.

Although Mary serves an important role in modern Christianity as the model of motherhood, it is important to acknowledge that she does not have a role in the spiritual nourishment of Christians. On the contrary, Christians are nourished by the word of God through interaction with it and service to its course[19]. The supposition that those who do not regard Mary as their mother are orphans is also not true since it violates the teachings of Jesus as a record in the Bible. According to Romans 8:14-17, there are no orphans in Christ as all Christians have a Father in God. Based on this evidence, it could be noted that while Mary remains an important figure in Christianity, her role and significance should be interpreted cautiously.

Conclusion

Mary is with little doubt one of the most renowned figures in the Bible. Even among those who have never read the book, Mary is known for her role in the process through which God saved mankind. Being the mother of Jesus, Mary played an important role in Jesus’ upbringing and set an example to millions of Christians across the world on how to lead a life by God’s laws. Despite her popularity, however, Mary has been the center of a range of divisive topics in Christianity as scholars and believers seem to disagree on certain aspects of her life and significance to the religion. According to some scholars, Mary was a descendant of David and this ensured that ancient prophecy over the lineage of Jesus was fulfilled through her being the mother of Jesus. This supposition is, however, based on Luke’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus through Mary. Matthew’s genealogy of the ancestors of Jesus is different from that of Luke as the former traces this lineage through Solomon while the latter traces it through Nathan[20]. Although other scholars interpret that Luke was tracing Mary’s lineage, he was tracing that of Joseph. When viewed in this context, it is difficult to ascertain whether Mary was a descendant of David. It is, however, clear that Jesus was a descendant of David since there is Biblical evidence that Joseph was from David’s lineage[21].

Among the divisive topics concerning the life and significance of Mary include whether she conceived Jesus without any human agency. Other topics that have been particularly divisive include whether she similarly ascended to heaven and whether Christians should pray to her. As noted through the current biographical study, however, there is no evidence that Mary ascended to heaven. As such, Christians should not pray to her as Jesus instructed that all prayers be addressed to God. It is, therefore, important for Christians to acknowledge the significance of Mary for her role in the birth and upbringing of Jesus rather than for her spiritual completeness. This is because all descendants of Adam and Eve have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory.

Bibliography

Bockmuehl, Markus. “The son of David and his mother.” Journal of Theological Studies 62.2 (2011): 476-493.

Brown, Raymond, E., Donfried, Karl, P., Fitzmyer, Joseph A., & Reumann, John, (eds.), Mary in the New Testament, Fortress/Paulist Press, 1978.

Dasnabedian, Thamar. “Mother of Christ the King and Her Influence, as Reflected in the Armenian Sharaknoc (Hymnary).” The Ecumenical Review 60.1/2 (2008): 53-58.

Hahn, Scott. Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God, Doubleday, 2001,

Kim, Stephen. “Encountering Jesus: Character Studies in the Gospel of John.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 53.4 (2010): 838-839.

Pagels, Elaine. “What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity.” Signs Journal 2.2 (1976): 293-303.

Pelikan, Jaroslav. Mary Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture, Yale University Press, 1998.

Procario-Foley, Elena. “In Quest of the Jewish Mary: The Mother of Jesus in History, Theology, and Spirituality.” Theological Studies 75.1 (2014): 171-173.

Ritva, Williams. “The Mother of Jesus at Cana: A social-science interpretation of John 2:1-12.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 59.4 (1997): 679-692.

The Holy Bible, New International Version. Grand Rapids. Zondervan Publishing House, 1984.

[1]
[1]         Procario-Foley, Elena. “In Quest of the Jewish Mary: The Mother of Jesus in History, Theology, and Spirituality.” Theological Studies 75.1 (2014): 172.

[2]
[2]          Procario-Foley, 173

[3]
[3]         Brown, Raymond,E.,Donfried, Karl, P., Fitzmyer, Joseph A., & Reumann, John, (eds.),Mary in the New Testament, Fortress/Paulist Press, 1978.
[4]
[4]         Brown, Raymond,E.,Donfried, Karl, P., Fitzmyer, Joseph A., & Reumann, John, (eds.),Mary in the New Testament, Fortress/Paulist Press, 1978.

[5]
[5]         Dasnabedian, Thamar. “Mother of Christ the King and Her Influence, as Reflected in the Armenian Sharaknoc (Hymnary).” The Ecumenical Review 60.1/2 (2008): 55.

[6]
[6]         Hahn, Scott. Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God, Doubleday, 2001,
[7]
[7]         Dasnabedian, 56

[8]
[8]         Hahn, Scott. Hail, Holy Queen: The Mother of God in the Word of God, Doubleday, 2001,

[9]
[9]         Ritva, Williams. “The Mother of Jesus at Cana: A social-science interpretation of John 2:1-12.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly59.4 (1997): 681

[10]
            [10]         The Holy Bible, New International Version

[11]
[11]          The Holy Bible, New International Version

[12]
[12]          The Holy Bible, New International Version

[13]
[13]          Pagels, Elaine. “What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting Images of God in Early Christianity.” Signs Journal 2.2 (1976): 298

[14]
[14]         Pagels, 299

[15]
[15]         Pelikan, Jaroslav. Mary Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture, Yale University Press, 1998.

[16]
[16]          Bockmuehl, Markus. “The son of David and his mother.” Journal of Theological Studies 62.2 (2011): 478.

[17]
[17]         Bockmuehl, 479

[18]
[18]         Pelikan, Jaroslav. Mary Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture, Yale University Press, 1998.
[19]
[19]         Kim, Stephen. “Encountering Jesus: Character Studies in the Gospel of John.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society53.4 (2010): 838.

[20]
[20]          Procario-Foley, Elena. “In Quest of the Jewish Mary: The Mother of Jesus in History, Theology, and Spirituality.” Theological Studies 75.1 (2014): 172.

[21]
[21]          Procario-Foley, 173

The post Mary, The Mother of Jesus appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

1 Peter 3:18-22 is arguably one of the most discussed and problematic passages in the New Testament (NT). The scripture has attracted the attention of scholars, thereby resulting in the development of varied interpretations. A careful analysis of this passage reveals that one can understand it from different perspectives. For example, a reader is most likely to conclude from this scripture that people have immortal souls. In other words, a person has another opportunity for salvation after death. The other possible interpretation of this passage is that Jesus went to hell and came up again. Since there is no extensive consensus on the correct interpretation of this scripture, it is relatively difficult for one to precisely determine the appropriate interpretation of the passage. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief exposition of 1 Peter 3:18-22, focusing on specific hermeneutical elements.

The first aspect that will be discussed in this exposition relates to the historical background of 1 Peter 3:18-22. Noticeably, it is suggested that the entire of 1 Peter is a baptismal hymn that places much emphasis on describing the concept of salvation.[1] Therefore, the historical background of 1 Peter 3:18-22 has to be traced back to Paul’s view about the idea of salvation. A critical evaluation of this passage reveals that Paul sought to label suffering as the primary focus and salvation from condemnation as the underlying cause of the hardships experienced by Christians as well as its definitive purpose. It is worth noting that at the time Paul was writing the I Peter, many Christians were facing persecution and trials due to their belief system. Consequently, anyone who followed Christ was psychologically prepared to die for Christ.

The second element that will be examined in this essay about 1 Peter 3:18-22 is the literary context. In verse 18, the speaker refers to the anguish, death, and resurrection of Jesus. On the other hand, the speaker alludes to the ascension and resurrection of Jesus in verse 22. Therefore, it is correct to conclude these two verses constitute a parenthesis in which Paul inserted one section into another part. A further in-depth evaluation of verse 18 indicates that the speaker focused on describing the earthly life of Jesus, whereas verses 21 and 22 emphasize explaining the heavenly aspect. In verses 19-20, the insertion mentions the proclamation of Jesus, while verse 21 alludes to baptism. Markedly, this scripture, as a whole, tells believers that Christ has saved them from sin, and He is now in control of their lives. Therefore, Christians should not be worried or lose hope in their faith, despite the suffering.

Further critical analysis of 1 Peter 3:18-22 indicates that the speaker used early Christian and Jewish literature to discuss the aspect of salvation. It is apparent from this passage that there are at least three pieces of evidence that connect its original Christian writings, and about the identification of the people who receive the proclamation of Christ. In particular, these proofs are the spirits, imprisonment of spirits, and the individuals who were categorized as sinners during the days of the era. It is imperative to note that the descriptions provided in the foregoing discussion do not accurately identify the receivers of Christ’s proclamation. One could argue that the “spirits” described in this passage refer to what arises from giants. In contrast, imprisonment is defined as the punishment that is usually linked with the “fallen angels.” Therefore, it is crucial to synthesize and review the applicable traditions from early Christian and Jewish literature. It is clear from the foregoing expository analysis of 1 Peter 3:18-22 that the speaker employs several literary devices to explain how suffering is a condition for salvation.

Bibliography

Hanson, Anthony. “Salvation Proclaimed: I Peter 3:18-22.”  Expository Times, vol. 93, no. 4 (1982).

[1] Anthony Hanson, “Salvation Proclaimed: I Peter 3:18-22,” Expository Times, 93, no. 4 (1982).

The post Peter 3:18–22 appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

In the first letter to Corinthians, Paul offered notable insights on the notion of love with regards to the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ. It is one of the widely quoted and referenced Epistles of Paul due to its comprehensive coverage of various and integral Christian subtopics, such as remembrance of the Last Supper, Holy Communion, as well as the compelling gifts of Holy[1]. However, even with these interesting and crucial details focused on the unity of Christians, it is essential to apprehend that it is also among the Pauline Letters whose verses have been greatly contested by a section of Christian scholars and theologians due to their confusing interpretations. Specifically, one of these relatively controversial and challenging verses of the First Corinthians includes 1 Corinthians (13:10). In its simplest form, the verse states: “When that which is perfect comes, then that which is in part shall be done away” KJV (1 Corinth 13:10).

The root source of controversy in the 1 Corinthians (13:10) is regarding its reference and use of the word ‘perfect’. Various scholars have published distinct articles and exegetical commentaries about the aforementioned verse. The respective publications have been endeavored at enabling the readers to easily interpret the contents of the verse by offering practical, effective guidelines to approach the verse’s underlying message. One of the essential scholars who have attempted to explore the specific meaning of the word ‘perfect’ comprises Compton[2]. Generally, Compton attempted to examine the understandings of the subsequent word based on the existing sources.

However, regardless of the divergent views on the actual apprehension of the verse, particularly consideration of the word ‘perfect,’ the underlying meaning of the verse can be easily approached by analyzing both its textual/literary meaning and its background context. The word ‘perfect’ can be extended to insinuate the essence of perfect knowledge of Jesus and God. Additionally, the term can be used to denote the comprehension of the anonymities of the heavenly kingdom. In this perspective, the verse then implies that the perfect knowledge of God, Jesus Christ, and heaven shall prevail but not in this life. According to the passage, this perfect knowledge will only be attained in the afterlife, and which is to come.

In this concern, Paul was indicating that God’s children will have perfect knowledge of Him and the heavenly kingdom. In this view, then the notion of “of that which is in part shall be done away” can be associated with the imperfection of knowledge which shall be overcome through the acquisition of the perfect knowledge. Therefore, based on the above discussion, it can be ascertained that the primary purpose of this passage (1 Corinthians 13:10) is to enlighten us about the fundamental spiritual gift of the perfect knowledge of God, Jesus, and the heavenly kingdom, which is yet to manifest.

Paul and Practice of Baptism

Towards the middle of his teaching on the issue of resurrection, Paul the apostle breaks to ask his audience in 1 Corinthians (15:29), “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? (NIV).” Alternatively, the verse may be interpreted to denote: “why are some people baptized on the behalf of the dead, if they are certain that the dead are not resurrected at all?” Irrespective of the dimension in which the verse is viewed, it is apparent that Paul’s statement about “baptism for the dead” is unclear and bewildering, which does its translations and meaning to be relatively uncertain. The complexity associated with this verse can be justified by the existence of diverse exegetical commentaries and scholarly articles based on the attempt to explore its underlying meaning.

As a result of these interpretation difficulties, it is, therefore, logical for some people to contemplate why significant emphasis should be placed on the assessment of the passage’s contents. Yet Paul’s notion for “baptism of the dead” is of much importance, first because of its exemplary application on the daily Christian life and secondly, Paul used it to substantiate the anticipated resurrection of Christian/believers[3]. Typically, the verse comprises several interpretations, with the profound readings relating the passage to the act of some Christians of Corinthian who were baptized on behalf of specific individuals who had died. However, the reliability and validity of this interpretation are vague and unrealistic since there is no actual reference of people opting to be baptized on behalf of the dead either in the Bible or ancient Christian writings.

Secondly, the respective assumption greatly conflict with Paul’s ministry about faith and message about salvation. Essentially, Paul expressed in some of his Epistles that salvation is a personal choice and entails making an individual confession and accepting Jesus to become a believer[4]. So what is the accurate translation of the 1 Corinthians (15:29)? The truth is, although Paul’s audience precisely understood what he meant by the ‘baptism of the dead,’ we, the readers, do not know. However, based on Paul’s casual tone while addressing his listeners, he was seemingly aware of the practice of the baptism of the dead among the Corinthian Christians.

Although Paul’s voice illustrates that he did not support the above act, his statement/question was not metaphorical, and he meant what he said. In this concern, it can be denoted that the Corinthians who were baptizing/being baptized on behalf of the dead were aware that baptism could not save the dead, but rather they exaggerated the actual importance of baptism. With this in mind, it is apparent that the Corinthians were overly bothered by believers who demised before being baptized and hence were fearful of spiritual loss as a consequence. The respective translations can be affirmed through the passages from other scriptures, which portray Paul as a lion for challenging some beliefs and practices endorsed by some traditional church communities and even the gospel itself.

Bibliography

Compton, R. Bruce. “1 Corinthians 13: 8–13 and the Cessation of Miraculous Gifts.” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 9, no. 2004 (1): 97144.

Hays, Richard B. First Corinthians. Westminster John Knox Press, 2011.

White, Joel R. ” Baptized on Account of the Dead: The Meaning of 1 Corinthians 15: 29 in Its Context.” Journal of Biblical Literature 116, no. 3 (1997): 487-499.

[1] Richard B. Hays, First Corinthians (Westminster John Knox Press, 2011)10.

[2] Bruce Compton, “1 Corinthians 13: 8–13 and the Cessation of Miraculous Gifts.” Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal 9, no. 1 (2004): 97144.

[3] Joel R. White, “Baptized on Account of the Dead”: The Meaning of 1 Corinthians 15: 29 in Its Context.” Journal of Biblical Literature 116, no. 3 (1997): 487.

[4] Ibid, 20

The post Paul and Spiritual Gifts appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The doctrinal theme of eternal punishment in the Bible has been interpreted diversely, leading to differences in how people understand judgment and eschatology. The clergy have utilized the importance of the perpetuity of the hellfire and doctrine of torment to force people to have faith in Christ and to avoid the blasting furnace of hellfire. Revelation 14:10-11 is concerned with the extent and nature of the punishment. The pericope provides a dire warning of eternal torment to those individuals who will worship Satan and receive the mark of the beast. The doctrinal tenets of the modern Church underscore the belief that the last judgment of the sinners to be facilitated and witnessed by Jesus and the holy angels will lead to everlasting and distressing chastisement.[1] Most evangelists repeat the message of eternal torment as an important component of faithful theological belief. The doctrine is presumed to be scriptural, and people are submissive to it under the strain of authority.

Mostly, there are no exegetical discussions that are cited during the interpretation of Revelation 14:10-11. The three main features of the pericope include the imageries that depict the traditional doctrine of hell. The passage suggests that the concept of judgment involving eternal torment describes how unbelievers will be punished with fire that would not be consumed and sulphur.[2] Besides, they will have no rest days demonstrating that their suffering will be perpetual. Furthermore, Revelation 14:10-11 presents the perpetuity of hellfire and the tribulations of the sinners who worship Satan as a judgment. The author used several imageries found in the Old Testament, such as the destruction of Edom, the ancient, as well as Sodom and Gomorrah (Isaiah 34:10, 13:19; Genesis 19:28). The passage presents a symbolical depiction of the final reality of the sinners who will be judged as opposed to the moment of eternal torment.[3] Unbelievers who will worship Satan will not have the eternal rest that is promised to the believers. Consequently, this scholarly work provides an exegetical interpretation of the doctrine of hell as eternal torment as written in Revelation 14: 10-11. Notably, God will ultimately judge His enemies with unconditional destruction and extermination.

Historical Analysis of the Book of Revelation 14: 10-11

Early Church customs and literature attest that the book of Revelation was written by John the Apostle in 95 A.D.[4] In Revelation 1:19, Jesus Christ specified that the author was foretelling his impending Second coming and the judgment of the sinners. John used imageries and allegories since he lacked sufficient words to connote the numerous things that he had seen. Besides, the writer used his prehistoric language predominantly spoken during his time to narrate his visions. Majorly, the author sought to offer comfort to the early Christian congregation, as attested by the pastoral tone utilized in Revelation.

Authorship of the Book of Revelation

Internal Evidence

Johannian composition of the book of Revelation is reinforced by numerous pieces of internal proofs. The early Christians actively got involved in the author’s divinatory ministry (Rev 3; 22:6-10, 18-19). Notably, the writer referred to himself as John in nearly five instances and confirmed that he was among the believers who being persecuted and banished in Patmos during the Domitic reign due to their resounding faith in Christ (Rev 1:1, 4, 9; 21:2; 22:8). The historical evidence has been corroborated by Eusebius, an early Church historian who described how Christians, including Paul and John, were oppressed by the Roman rulers.[5] Additionally, the writer witnessed Jesus Christ’s early salvation mission (Rev 1:2), which may strongly prove he was among the key disciples of Jesus Christ during His earthy ministry on earth. Notably, John the Apostle was one of the favorite Disciples of Christ and accompanied the Messiah in key events such as the transfiguration. Besides, John and Peter were among the first people to arrive at the empty tomb where Jesus was buried after His crucifixion.

Moreover, the Jewish lexes and expressions utilized in the Scripture suggest the writer was a Hebrew. Markedly, several words are derived from the Jewish language are commonly used, for instance, “Hallelujah,” “Amen,” “the children of Israel,” “Abaddon,” “synagogue,” and “the tribe of Judah,” among others (Rev 2:7, 2:9, 2:14, 3:9, 9:11, 14, 2:17, 19:1-6, 22:2). Additionally, descriptions of the Jewish Temple are included in the initial chapters of the book. Similarly, the book of Revelation indicates that the person who wrote letters that were sent to the seven churches was a powerful overseer of the institutions and congregations.[6] Available evidence shows evangelist Paul was succeeded by John the Apostle, which forced the latter to relocate to Asia Minor where the churches were concentrated, proving that John wrote the apocalyptic book.[7] Furthermore, the structure and content of Revelation closely resemble other of John’s texts. Comparable catchphrases and wordings are utilized in both Johannine writings in the New Testament. For instance, the term “Lamb of God” is utilized nearly 27 times in both the Revelation and Fourth Gospel.[8] Besides, the unique idioms, such as “Word of God” and “God is light,” are mostly John’s compositions in both the gospel and epistles (Rev 19:13; John 1:4; 1 John 1:5).

Moreover, the Johannine literature distinctly emphasizes the significance of the number seven, for example, the word “seven” is utilized more than fifty times in the Apocalypse to indicate different phenomenon such as seven plagues, spirits, churches, angels, trumpets, and mountains, among others.[9] Similarly, the Fourth Gospel mentions seven “I Am” testaments made by Jesus Christ. Besides, both the apocalyptic writing and the Gospel of John share close connections in how they describe Christology. John’s writings focused on the mysticism of Christ while recognizing His divine spot in the Holy Trinity (Rev 3:12; 14:1, 14). Furthermore, the author differentiated between the supremacy of Yahweh and the subordinate power of the Lamb or Jesus (Rev 7:19). Besides, the author recognized Christ’s interminable nature by recognizing and praised Him using majestic and divines names, for instance, “Alpha and Omega,” “Word of God,” and “Holy and True,” among others. Notably, Johannine scriptures indicate that Christ will come to judge and punish the sinners.

External Evidence

Patristic evidence attributed to the founding figures, doctors, clergy, and theologians during the development of the early Church reinforces the argument that John the Apostle wrote the prophetic and apocalyptic revelation. Specifically, Irenaeus, Apollonius, Justin Martyr, and Theophilus of Antioch have all attested to the validity of Johannine authorship of the revelation. They played a role in ensuring the book of Revelation was included in the New Testament.[10] Similarly, Tertullian, Gregory Nazianzen, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Eusebius, Origen, Victorinus, Jerome, and Athanasius are some notable theologians, clergymen, and church historian who have broadly referred to the Revelation in their seminal work and confirmed that John wrote the prophetic book.[11] Alternatively, different scholars, such as Dionysius, Marcion, Epiphanius of Salamis, and Council of Laodicea (ca.360), among others, have rejected John’s authorship of the book claiming the writer did not ascribe apostolic title to his work since he was neither an apostle nor a Hebrew prophet.[12] Nonetheless, the corroborated evidence contained in writings of early Christian tradition overwhelmingly supports Johannine’s composition of the Apocalypse while under divine guidance.

Dating of the Book of Revelation

Several dates have been proposed to ascertain the proximate time when Revelation was authored. The major categories include the late date (A.D. 98-117), middle date (A.D. 54-68 A.D), and the early date (A.D. 41-54).[13]Nonetheless, scholars emphasize that the book was authored during the time of Emperor Nero (54-68 A.D.). The Roman ruler was responsible for persecuting the Christians and the destruction of the Jerusalem temple. Similarly, Irenaeus supported the middle age estimation (A.D. 81-96), asserting Revelation was written when Domitian ruled the Roman Empire.[14] Moreover, Irenaeus’ seminal work titled, Against Heresies, acknowledged 11 times that John wrote the Revelation.[15] Consequently, based on the book’s canonicity, it is universally accepted by historians and theologians that Revelation was composed by John the Apostles almost A.D. 95 after he received a vision from Christ.[16] Importantly, Rev 1:9-10 and evidence provided by Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, are regarded as important internal and external validations that confirm John composed the prophetic and apocalyptic Revelation while still being imprisoned in Patmos.

The significance of determining authorship and dating of Revelation is largely to find out how John the apostles capitalized on the philosophy of perpetual torment in his scriptural writings contained in the New Testament. Notably, the Fourth John assumes that the singular path to receiving eternal life is having unrelenting devotion towards Jesus Christ as the savior. John’s gospel does not focus much on the punishment that awaits sinners. The subject of salvation for believers is widely covered in John’s scriptures (John 3:15, 16, 36; 5:24; 20:31; 1 John 5:11-13). The book reveals the consequence for sinners who refuse to accept Jesus as their savior. Such nonbelievers will be doomed to eternal torment.

Occasion and Audience of the Book of Revelation

Jesus Christ presented a vision of the Apocalypse to John the Apostle while still imprisoned in Patmos. Christ wanted to remind the Church about the terrible punishment that awaits the nonbelievers for their unfaithfulness. Jesus directed John to write the apparition and share it with the seven churches, namely Pergamos, Smyrna, Philadelphia, Ephesus, Sardis, Laodicea, and Thyatira, which were found in Minor Asia (Rev 1:9-11). The strategic location of the seven cities, specifically along the well-traveled Roman roads, allowed the prophetic and apocalyptic text to be widely distributed, read and understood by the Christians. In Revelation 2:9, 3:2, and 13, Christ reminded them of His companionship since the early Christians were facing persecution during the Domitic period (81-96 A.D.). The churches struggled with internal and external challenges, which impacted their faith. Nonetheless, the Christians in Sardis and Smyrna proved to be resilient despite the misfortunes, societal influences, and tyranny (Rev 3: 4). The external influences and internal wrangles led some Christians to adopt wicked lifestyles and abandoned their faith and obedience to Yahweh (Rev 2: 6, 14, 20; 3:15). Notably, churches’ tribulations were a central highlight of John the Apostle’s ministry. He encouraged the brethren to deal with all issues that threatened the early churches and overcome the dreadful persecutions.[17] The revelation sought to connect spirituality and apocalyptic events to encourage the Church congregation and nonbelievers to be always alert and ready for the coming of Jesus as a righteous way of avoiding eternal torment (Rev 2:7, 11, 16; 3: 21).

Setting and Purpose of the Book of Revelation

In the initial chapter of the Revelation, bible readers are informed that John was given the apocalyptic vision while being held in captivity in Patmos (Rev 1:9). Arguments about the identity of the Patmos as the place the book was authored is less contentious as John strongly hinted where he received the apparition and was asked to share it with the early Churches. The overall objective of Revelation is that the Lord will judge those people who persecute faithful believers. The author sought to support righteous discipleship by encouraging Christian to strongly endure their misery, especially the prospects of martyrdom akin to how Jesus conquered evil and darkness. The Revelation represents victory and redemption of those who trust in Jesus Christ as a glorious ruler and the Lamb sacrificed to save people from mortal sin.

Additionally, the book describes God’s intention to liberate people from the bondage of sin and protect them from the eternal fire in hell to demonstrate his love and grace. Importantly, the Johannine revelation sought to provide comfort, assurance, and hope to the brethren owing to the tribulations that they endured.[18] God promised them eternal rewards in heaven for their resilience and devotion. Consequently, the book serves a consolatory purpose by reassuring the believers about the Lord’s consolation and protection. Additionally, the doctrinal objective is also evident in the vision as it emphasizes God’s providence and restoration that will be strongly evident when Christ returns. Lastly, the prophetic text achieves the practical and hortative goal by encouraging both the believers and sinners to be spiritually, mentally, and physically ready to receive Christ again.

Furthermore, John focused on the divergent nature of good and evil, Jesus and Satan, in addition to how Christ will ultimately emerge victoriously. The people have a choice to solely worship the Lord. Other major themes include God’s kingdom, adoration, and deliverance. Revelation emphasizes how Christ is the victor when it comes to solving the phenomenal controversy of good and evil. Consequently, the angel’s message purposely focused on the primeval context and prevailing circumstances that the early Christians had to endure. Moreover, John made a prophetic call to inspire the brethren to be resilient in the wake of oppression, maintain their divine commitments, and avoid the negative pressures of the environment, especially the pervading popular culture in the Greco-Roman society.[19] Consequently, another dominant thematic issue includes the judgment day that will be heralded by the return of the Messiah. The Scripture solely focuses on inspiring the brethren to demonstrate determination and faithfulness regardless of the severity of current and future tribulations. Importantly, through Jesus, God would deliver absolute triumph over Satan’s power and control. Jesus’ Second Coming and judgment represent the defeat of Satan and his endeavors to subvert piety and devotion among believers.

Literary Analysis of Revelation 14: 10-11

Literary Structure

Revelation 13 and 14 can be taken to be parallel. Chapter 13 demonstrates the attack on the wicked remnant, and Revelation 14 addresses the faithful remnant. In chapter 14, verses 1-5 and 6-12, the reader can see the transition to the wicked people from the remnant. In Revelation 13, the author describes the dragon engaged in warfare with the remnant of the woman, which progresses to the point of death threats issued to the remnant after the chapter. However, in the fourteenth chapter, the visualization opens up with observing the remnant, which includes 144,000 faithful continuing to adore and venerate God, despite facing the danger of being persecuted.[20] Also, chapter 13 indicates that those who face impending doom are the remnant of God who refuses to bow down to the beast, while in chapter 14, death awaits those who show devotion to the beast and abandon their Creator. Therefore, the message by the three angels could be viewed as the ultimate petition to those who partake in adoring and venerating the beast. The pericope represents that message of hope, “the eternal gospel” by the angel to pass on to “every nation tribe, language, and people” on earth (14:6). The events included in the warning are about to happen as soon after this, there are two consecutive harvests of the beast-worshiping remnant, and it introduces the happenings of seven bowls of God’s wrath described in chapter 15.

Genre

The author of the book of Revelation uses multiple literary styles, including prophecy, letter, and apocalypse in writing the text. However, the book is predominated by the apocalyptic style and, therefore, assigned to the apocalyptic literature literary genre. The form of the genre incorporates the literary device of visions to make the message vivid by uncovering it through symbols and signs.[21] Revelation 14:11 is characterized by the use of various such symbols as the “smoke,” the “beast” and its image, and the “mark” of its name, which specifically places it under the symbolism sub-genre of apocalyptic literature.[22] It is marked by symbolic angels, a comparison between evil and good, as well as prophecies of terror and the end of the world. Numbers are also a significant element of its literary device. Revelation is the only text in the New Testament that includes the literary genre of apocalyptic literature. Other examples where the style is applied are found in the Old Testament, including the books of Zechariah and Daniel, as well as in particular passages like Isaiah 24-17 and Ezekiel 37-39.[23]  Revelation 1:1 highlights the symbolic aspect of the apocalyptic writing that the author tries to unravel. While addressing multiple Christian communities in Minor Asia, the author tries to recount what he has heard, seen, or recognized in the course of his vision presented to him by Jesus. The text is identified as a “revelation,” which appeals to the idea of unveiling something that was previously hidden, covered, or in secret.[24] The audience is encouraged to view all actions and portrayed in the book as figurative and symbolic, except in cases where the author indicates the literal meaning that must be assumed. To have a proper understanding of Revelation 14: 10-11, it is important to interpret the passage’s apocalyptic symbolism. The passage also focuses on symbolism, which requires analysis to comprehend the message communicated through its characters, features, and events. The three key symbols tied to the end of times include the smoke, the beast, and the mark.

The Smoke

The smoke, as used to depict the end of times in Revelation 14:11, is a symbol of terror and destruction by God’s wrath upon those who revere Satan. In the phrase, “and the smoke of their torment,” the term smoke is followed by the word torment, which signifies that the final days will be characterized by the painful annihilation of those who refuse to worship God and instead choose to go against His will. As Everett observed, the symbolism is drawn from the events of destruction that were seen in Sodom and Gomorrah as described in Genesis 19:28.[25] The demolition of the cities as witnessed by Abraham is considered a signal of the destruction of the impious, and the smoke that went up from them is an emblem of what rises from the place where wicked people undergo eternal suffering. The source of the smoke in the current passage will be the bodies of the wicked in burning sulfur, which constitutes part of God’s cup of anger upon those who worship the beast.[26] Moreover, the fact that the smoke ascends forever and ever signifies the eternal nature of the torment, which is also implicated in Mathew 25:46, whereby the sinners will be sent away to eternal punishment. This will mark a permanent end to all forms of evil and result in a situation whereby all humans on earth will worship God alone.

The Beast and the Mark

The book of Revelation 14:11 talks of the beast which is capable of stealing people’s souls from God. In this context, the term “beast” is utilized to portray a wild, adversarial creature which humans should make every effort to avoid. However, “beast” is symbolic, and the context is not describing an actual animal.[27] It represents Satan, who tries to antagonize God and compete with him in winning the souls of men. The beast uses its “mark” to identify the people who are devoted to Satan.[28] The mark, which is identified as the number 666, has received many controversial interpretations, with many analysts trying to unravel its literal meaning in the modern world.[29] However, Everett revealed that the number “666” could be considered as a furtive representation of the ancient pagan mysteries elated to devil worshipping.[30] Therefore, the author of Revelation used the symbolism of the mark to refer to the practice of deserting God’s teachings and embracing paganism as their way of life.

Exposition/Interpretation of Revelation 14: 10-11

There is a need to consider symbolism and assessment of Biblical background while assessing how final judgment is described in Revelation 14:11. The Biblical imagery of judgment by fire and sulphur does not emphasize eternal torment but the pivotal annihilation of God’s enemies.[31] The context of Revelation 14: 10-11 can be traced to the oracle of Edom’s destruction and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah’s devastation (Genesis 19:28; Isaiah 34:10). Furthermore, the moment of judgment is referenced by the torment encountered by God’s enemies in the presence of the Lamb and the angels. The adversaries’ annihilation is a symbol of their extinction as described in Isaiah 34 and Genesis 19. Consequently, Revelation 14: 10-11 attempts to provide an alternative account regarding the defeat of God’s enemies. The pericope can be compared to Revelation 18 that details the fall of Babylon, whereby the natives faced the full wrath of God’s torment in their final judgment.[32] The excruciating moment of vicious judgment or eternal torment is described through the use of sulphur and fire. Alternatively, the memorial and depiction of devastation or the evidence of enduring, eternal distress after God’s judgment are represented by the smoke of the suffering that will rise eternally.[33] The sinners will have no rest day demonstrating the unrelenting nature of God’s eternal reprimand.

The message proclaimed by the three angels has three major features that enable biblical readers to correctly interpret Revelation 14: 10-11. Notably, John uses the verb εἶδον to draw readers’ attention from the account of the righteous people who will enter God’s Kingdom.[34] Consequently, the message was not intended for the remnants who also feared God, and their foreheads bore the seal of the Lord. The message can be perceived as a caution to the earth and its populations that they must be righteous to be written in the book of life.[35] The passage also warns people against being unfaithful and their wickedness. Those individuals who worship the beast will face God’s judgment and complete devastation that will eliminate the wicked eternally (Revelation 14:11, 15:7). The righteous are promised a place in paradise where they will live with God forever. John presents a climatic warning message in Revelation 14:10-11 for the disobedient and sinful people as well as those who will lack the seal of the Lord on their foreheads. The outcome of venerating the unholy trinity will lead to judgment and perpetual devastation for the wickedness.

Canonical Analysis of Revelation 14: 10-11

The Immediate Context of Revelation 14: 10-11

The book of Revelation focuses on the issue of eternal fire and judgment. John provides a comprehensive assessment of the eschatological devastation and annihilation that will happen in Babylon (Rev 18:18; 21). Similarly, Revelation 20:10 details how Satan and his followers will be cast into eternal torment. The eschatological judgment, also known as κατέφαγεν, will involve sheer obliteration of the sinful people who will not be included in the book of life, Satan, and his angels.[36] They will be cast in a lake of eternal fire to face their second death (Rev 20: 14, 15). Revelation 12:1 to 14:20 describes the great controversy theme where the dragon is symbolically depicted devouring Jesus, fighting God, and oppresses His people. Furthermore, Revelation 13 narrates how the dragon, notably the faithful woman, as well as how the land and sea beast collectively strive to ensure people worship Satan. The unholy trinity proved to be a threat as many people were martyred for standing firm against venerating the beast (Revelation 13:15).

Additionally, Revelation 14 includes a symbolical representation of the 144,000 people to denote the faithful remnants who survived the purge since they continued to worship God and had their seals on the forehead.[37]Ultimately, the three angels were sent to warn the world about the impending God’s judgment, the second coming of Jesus Christ, and the separation of the harvest. The book of Revelation focused on the concept of judgment for those who declined to repent and worship Yahweh (Revelation 12:1-14:20). Eschatological people are urged to leave Babylon and accept the true God’s divinity to avoid punishment. Notable, Satan capitalizes on fear to compel people to obey and worship him. Nonetheless, God neutralizes the beasts’ threats and strengthens people to secure their allegiance.

The Wider Context of Revelation 14: 10-11

Revelation 14:14-20 comprehensively describes how the three angels will announce the final harvest judgment. The description contains imagery and verbal clues similar to those in Revelation 14:9-11 that also provide warning proclamation. The verses focus on the eternal, conscious torment after the judgment, but it will end in the elimination and destruction of God’s enemies. Revelation 14:10-11 can be compared with Isaiah 34:8-17 that focuses on the oracle against Edom. Moreover, Isaiah 34 describes the eschatological judgment for those who opposed God’s kingdom. Notably, a smoke that burns forever, an endless judgment, and flaming sulphur are mentioned in the Isaianic passage and Revelation 14:11 to signify the destruction of Edom or God’s wrath against the unbelievers. John adopted inverted parallelism to describe how an individual will receive the mark of the beast and its image on their hands and forehead for worshipping him.[38] Besides, sulphur and fire will be used to torture the unsaved in the presence of Lamb and the holy angels.

The imagery of devastation is also depicted in other parts of the Bible, especially the Old Testament, for instance, the prophecy of Edom (Isaiah 34) and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19). Analysis of both passages, there is evidence that such places will be completely ruined and no person will be spared, and the fire will burn ceaselessly. Notably, the assessment is consistent with Biblical theology that emphasizes the pericope means the elimination of sinfulness when people refuse to obey God and eternal life. The traditionalist understanding of Revelation 14:10-11 disregards the disconfirmation of the doctrine of eternal torment. The pericope includes a warning to God’s enemies that they will be harshly judged. Some theologians state that the Book of Revelation recapitulates the visions regarding divine judgment. There are several resembling accounts of how God will judge His foes (Rev 11:15-18; 14:6-20; 19:6-20). Notably, the proclamation about the impending judgment on Babylon is clearly described in Revelation 14 and 18. Besides, the angel’s proclamation on judgment upon God’s nemeses is similarly covered in Revelation 19:17-20:10 and Revelation 14:9-11. Furthermore, the inviolability of the martyrs is detailed in both Revelation 20:11-21 and Revelation 14:12-13. The semantic of final, decisive devastation immensely focuses on judgment rather than eternal torment described in Revelation 14:11. The similar imagery of how the smoke will rise perpetually are evident in Revelation 18:18 and 19:3. Moreover, Revelation 14:9-11 also contains similarities with Revelation 6: 12-1, particularly on when the terrible and intense God’s judgment will come. Both passages describe the fury of the Lord in full strength against the sinners. Despite focusing on portraying the final judgment, the book of Revelation minimally details the enduring, ceaseless conscious punishment.

Application of Revelation 14: 10-11

There are many ways in which the message in Revelation 14:11 can be applied in today’s context. Some of the theological implications arising from the passage concern sin and how the Creator deals with those who choose to lead wicked ways. On one hand, sin represents a wrecked relationship between God and humans. Once Adam and Eve committed the sinful act while in the Garden of Eden as indicated in the book of Genesis, God already had a plan in place to save man and re-establish the link that was destroyed as a result of sin.[39] The Bible, particularly the New Testament, includes numerous instances that demonstrate God’s salvation and ways of regaining this relationship. Jesus’ death on the cross afforded humans the privilege to have their sins wiped out as long as they showed remorse and asked for forgiveness for their misdeeds.

Similarly, the passage of Revelation 14:11 emphasizes the idea that the Creator does not perpetuate transgression but will eliminate it. God is never pleased with sinfulness, and the text of Revelation covers numerous scenarios where He is pleading with humans to repent and change their evil ways. He is also a jealous God who seeks to retain His position as the mightiest before all creatures. Ultimately, those who disobey him are doomed to death. Also, sin never wins in the presence of God, but only His eternal kingdom.[40] Therefore, He will eradicate any false prophets, the beast, and their followers. Christians are encouraged to leave their sinful ways, follow Jesus, and worship God in spirit and truth. This implies showing full dedication to serving the Lord in their day-to-day lives. The Christian clergy must correctly emphasize the infinity of the hellfire and doctrine of eternal torment to provide a basis for modern churches and Christians to strengthen their faith in Christ and to avoid the severe judgment that will involve being cast in eternal hellfire.

Revelation 14:10-11 references the account of Sodom and Gomorrah as written in Genesis 19:28. The obliteration of the two cities is theologically translated to mean the annihilation of the sinners. The sinners will endure eternal and severe suffering. The New Testament doctrine is quite compacted and definitive on the eternal torment of the sinners. Notably, Christ also focused on the subject of punishment for the wicked or divine wrath more than his disciples. Nonetheless, Christians are encouraged to faithful to God, especially in times of trial.[41] The gospel calls on people to fear God and glorify Him since it helps to uproot the bases of the antichrist and his dominion. Any person who continues to worship the beast and promote his cause must expect to be perpetually depressed in body and soul. Professing Jesus’ faith and being obedient to God’s commandment will protect the believers from any suffering.[42]Furthermore, Christians are called to be ready to be killed in the state of union and cause of the Lord. Such martyrdom will allow believers to receive eternal rest from all persecution, sorrow, temptation, and sin. The Lamb will judge and condemn the followers or worshippers of the beasts, while the holy angels will act as the executioners who will assemble and separate them from the virtuous people then throw them into the blast furnace of hellfire.[43] Besides, the holy angels will be present throughout the ordeal to spectate and rejoice in their eternal torment. The glory and power of the Lamb and the holy angels will worsen the suffering of the sinful people. The fury of the Lord against wickedness will be unmerciful and without hope.

Revelation 14: 10-11 focuses on presenting the image of God’s triumph and the defeat of the beast.  Immediately after the second angel proclaimed the fall of Babylon owing to its wickedness, spiritual fornication, and rebellion against God, the third angel cautioned the people about the imminent judgment. The unbelievers will face the full wrath of God for worshipping the beast.[44] They will be condemned to hellfire and brimstone where the smoke of their suffering perpetually rises. The people will have no rest forever for receiving the mark on Satan on their forehead or hands. Loyalty to the antichrist and his dominion will lead to God’s strong punishment.[45] The same message is reiterated in Jeremiah 25:15 and Psalm 75:8.  Consequently, the adversaries of God will not escape His anger and wrath, since Jesus Himself could not avoid it if were possible (Matthew 26:39). God’s fury is steadfast hostility towards unrighteousness and sin. Revelation 14: 10-11 teaches numerous significant truths regarding hell and the eternal fate of the condemned sinners. The real torment will be largely abhorrent and hurting. God will be present in hell through His angels and the Lamb to proclaim His virtuous judgment, holy justice, sacredness, and fury against sin. The majority of the unbelievers who worshipped the beast and were sent to hell would wish that God was absent. Nonetheless, since the veneration of Satan on earth was not interrupted by penitence, the eternal torment of the unbelievers will also not be stopped by deferred repentance sought in hell.

Conclusion

Revelation 14:11 is categorized in apocalyptic literature as it mainly focuses on prophecies on the events that are generally connected to the description of the end of times. The passage incorporates the use of symbolism to make the audience understand the happenings associated with the end times. The smoke that ascends forever from torment could be viewed as the consequences faced by those who fail to worship God or turn away from their sins. They await destruction and eternal torment and will neither see the kingdom of God nor receive rest. The book of Revelation is relevant to modern Christian despite its medieval authorship to the early church. The original historical context of the apocalypse is transcended by the numerous spiritual truths. Nonetheless, evangelists, theologians, and the larger congregation of believers must be cautious of the exegetical interpretation of the Revelation. Failure to correctly analyze the complex imageries, symbols, and prophecies contained in the book can easily distort the message.

Moreover, Revelation 14: 10-11 has a universal application that is constrained to the churches in Asia Minor. The pericope assists in strengthening the faith of the brethren by demonstrating how worshipping the true God will lead to eternal rest while evil and wickedness will be judged harshly. Furthermore, the passage assures those persecuted Christians to be firm believers in God’s power, providence, and divinity. They will be written in the book of life and escape the eternal torment that is characterized by hellfire that will burn perpetually. The prophetic and apocalyptic message in Revelation 14: 10-11 provides comfort, encouragement, and exhortation to the righteous people that God will always be with them and guide them to subdue Satan’s fears and threats, which are aimed at forcing them to worship and glorify him. The passage comprehensively advances the general theme of the book of Revelation, namely, God’s plan to bring the entire cosmos under His dominion and power. Moreover, Revelation reminds believers to anticipate suffering, but they are called to be faithful and trustful of God’s sovereignty and accept that Jesus Christ reigns supreme and will ensure righteousness triumphs over evil.

Bibliography

Aune, David E. Revelation 6–16: Word Biblical Commentary, 52B. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998.

Bacchiocchi, Samuele. “Hell: Eternal Torment or Annihilation?” Endtime Issues 7, no. 2 (1999): 1-8.

Bowles, Ralph G. “Does Revelation 14: 11 Teach Eternal Torment?” Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism, 9, no. 3 (2014): 138-54.

Craigen, Trevor P. “Eternal Punishment in John’s Revelation.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 9, no. 2 (1998): 191-201.

Davis, Christopher A. Revelation. Harare: College Press, 2000.

Duke, Rodney K. “Eternal Torment or Destruction? Interpreting Final Judgment Texts.” Evangelical Quarterly 88, no. 3 (2016).

Kistemaker, Simon J., and William Hendriksen. Exposition of the Book of Revelation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001.

Osborne, Grant R. Revelation: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Michigan: Baker Academic, 2002.

Paulien, Jon. “Beale, GK The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 38, no. 2 (2000): 313-314.

Powys, David J. ‘Hell’: A Hard Look at a Hard Question: The Fate of the Unrighteous in New Testament Thought. Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2007.

Resseguie, James L. The Revelation of John: A Narrative Commentary. Michigan: Baker Academic, 2009.

Savige, Craig. “Biblical answers about Hell.” Accessed November 28, 2020, http://victoryfaithcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/AnswersHell.pdf

Stefanovic, Ranko. Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2009.

Sweeney, Jon M. Inventing Hell: Dante, the Bible and Eternal Torment. London: Hachette UK, 2014.

Swete, Henry Barclay. The Apocalypse of St. John: The Greek Text with Introduction Notes and Indices. Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999.

[1] David J. Powys, ‘Hell’: A Hard Look at a Hard Question: The Fate of the Unrighteous in New Testament Thought. (Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2007), 11.

[2] Ibid., 15.

[3] Gary H. Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures: The Book of Revelation (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2018), 5.

[4] Ibid., 4.

[5] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 6.

[6] Ibid., 6.

[7] Ibid., 7.

[8] Ibid., 8.

[9] Ibid., 6-10.

[10] Ibid., 11.

[11] Ibid., 13

[12] Ibid., 13.

[13] Ibid., 17.

[14] Ibid., 17.

[15] Ibid., 17.

[16] Ibid., 17.

[17] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19

[18] Ibid., 22.

[19] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19-22.

[20] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19.

[21] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19.

[22] Ibid., 19.

[23] Ibid., 33.

[24] Ibid., 33-34.

[25] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 19.

[26] Duke, Rodney K. “Eternal Torment or Destruction? Interpreting Final Judgment Texts.” Evangelical Quarterly 88, no. 3 (2016): 5.

[27] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 20.

[28] Ibid., 19-20.

[29] Ibid., 20.

[30] Ibid., 19-20.

[31] Simon J. Kistemaker and William Hendriksen, Exposition of the Book of Revelation. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2001), 26.

[32] Jon Paulien, “Beale, GK The Book of Revelation: A Commentary on the Greek Text.” Andrews University Seminary Studies 38, no. 2 (2000): 314.

[33] Grant R. Osborne, Revelation: Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 16.

[34] Christopher A. Davis, Revelation. (Harare: College Press, 2000), 21.

[35] Craig Savige, “Biblical answers about Hell.” Accessed November 28, 2020, http://victoryfaithcentre.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/AnswersHell.pdf

[36] David E. Aune, Revelation 6–16: Word Biblical Commentary, 52B. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1998), 18.

[37] Ranko Stefanovic, Revelation of Jesus Christ: Commentary on the Book of Revelation. (Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press, 2009), 34.

[38] Everett, Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures, 20.

[39] Swete, Henry Barclay. The Apocalypse of St. John: The Greek Text with Introduction Notes and Indices. (Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999), 11.

[40] James L. Resseguie, The Revelation of John: A Narrative Commentary. (Michigan: Baker Academic, 2009), 56.

[41] Ralph G. Bowles, “Does Revelation 14: 11 Teach Eternal Torment?” Rethinking Hell: Readings in Evangelical Conditionalism, 9, no. 3 (2014): 148.

[42] Trevor P. Craigen. “Eternal Punishment in John’s Revelation.” The Master’s Seminary Journal 9, no. 2 (1998): 195.

[43] Samuele Bacchiocchi. “Hell: Eternal Torment or Annihilation?” Endtime Issues 7, no. 2 (1999): 4.

[44] Jon M. Sweeney, Inventing Hell: Dante, the Bible and Eternal Torment. (London: Hachette UK, 2014), 52.

[45] Bowles, “Does Revelation 14: 11 Teach Eternal Torment?” 142.

The post Exposition of the Book of Revelation 14:11 appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The letter to Romans is one of the essential Pauline epistles initially written by Paul, the apostle. It distinguishes itself as the most precise and systematically organized overview of Christianity values and dogmas as compared to the rest of Paul’s letters. Generally, Paul introduces Roman’s epistles by offering insights into the observable or physical nature of the world, particularly emphasizing the sinfulness of humankind[1]. With this, Paul first highlights the origin of sin and how all humanity has been tainted by the iniquity that resulted due to man’s rebellion against the ultimate creator of the universe-God. However, he sheds light on the above condemnation by outlining God’s plan of salvation through the blood of Jesus Christ. Further, Paul indicates that receiving salvation is not the absolute objective of Christianity, it is a continuous process as everyone is sanctified as they fuel their pursuits of eternal life. Realistically, how Paul handled the issues in this apostolic letter provides a logical and comprehensive analysis of how an individual can be saved from the eternal penalty and consequences of their sins.

However, regardless of the positive implications of Paul’s letters to the Romans in the scope of inclusive Christian life and journey, it is apparent that Paul had numerous objectives and aims while writing the scripture. Unlike other gospels in the New Testament, such as the Gospel of John, which was solely focused on preaching the message of salvation, it is evident that Paul was in an urge to address several issues and matters pertaining to the subjects of the origin of sins and the probable escape route for humankind. In this concern, numerous theories have been devised by diverse scholars and theologians to explore and grasp the fundamental reasons that prompted Paul to write his epistle to the Romans. According to Porter, there are various and distinct philosophies that have been derived throughout human history concerning  the actual purpose of Romans[2]. Although each of the theories discussed by Porter in his manuscript exhibits some weaknesses, I find the Compendium of the Christian Religion theory to be the most compelling as compared to other philosophical frameworks.

Generally, the Compendium of the Christian Religion theory is among the oldest conceptual in the world focused on deriving the root of the Romanian epistle and remains to be one of the relatively reliable and accurate sources of information concerning Paul’s intent to script this letter. According to this theory, Phillip Melanchthon argued that the letter was initially written to Paul to the unknown church in Rome, where he systematically outlines his anticipated visit to Rome, as well as his corresponding traveling plan. The antecedent verses of the epistle appropriately justify Paul’s initial prompt to authoring this letter. In my view, the fundamental reasons which necessitated or inspired Paul to write the epistle of Romans were to inform and prepare the Romanian Christians about his much-anticipated visit to Rome and establishing early friendship ties with them as a way of preventing any possible resistance/rebellion and conflict that may be perpetrated by the regional believers.

The Authorship of Ephesians

Generally, authorship of Ephesians has emerged to be a relatively controversial and widely debated topic among distinct scholars, historians, and theologians, among others, throughout history. Although substantial scholarly resources have consent and attributed this letter to Paul’s original work, many people are yet to justify the validity of this evidence. Notable numbers of evangelical writers doubt the legitimacy of this epistle. While some reputable theologians and Biblical scholars may inculpate evangelicals of a divulgence bias with regards to the above problem, such an accusation denotes a casual disregarding of the massive evidence that strongly inclines the vast majority of people in support of Pauline authorship.

Further, the subgroup of individuals who certainly believe that the views of the Ephesians correspond to Paul’s teachings and philosophy although he was not involved in the writing of the book could corroborate the inconsistency of this postulation. Nonetheless, the respective derivation is dependent on how they apprehend or interpret the existing autobiographical information and elucidates theology. However, regardless of the prevailing assumptions and theories aimed at offering divergent opinions about the authorship of Ephesians, vast evidence affirms that Paul is undeniably the writer of Ephesians. Typically, Ephesians constitute an extensive embodiment of materials reported in the context of the first person’s discourse of the apostle to the Christians of Ephesus.

For instance, according to Ephesians (3:2-6), Paul generally provides the accounts of his mystery stewardship and which appropriately reflects the elements of his apostolic endeavors. Additionally, Paul wrote a prayer for his audience, in which he even introduced himself in the context of the first persona as “I Paul” and continues by saying “the prisoner of Jesus Christ” (Ephesians 3:1). In this case, Paul was trying to recount the unfolding episodes that transpired during his initial call to become a gospel minister. Ultimately, Paul concludes the letter to Ephesians by remarking about his assistance, known as Tychicus, who will be tasked with the delivery of the epistle to Ephesians (Ephesians 6:21). With this in mind, it is logical to conclude that the respective explanations overrule the argument presented by those in support of the pseudepigraphy authorship. Moreover, Paul’s indications of the specific associate whom he will send to convey the letter to the Ephesus in the final section of Ephesians is a precise justification that the epistle is a legitimate product of Paul, and therefore, was not composed by any of  Paul`s partners.

Bibliography

Guerra, Anthony J. Romans and the Apologetic Tradition: The Purpose, Genre and Audience of Paul’s Letter. Vol. 81. Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Porter, Stanley E. The Apostle Paul: His Life, Thought, and Letters. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2016.

[1]Anthony J. Guerra, Romans and the Apologetic Tradition: The Purpose, Genre and Audience of Paul’s Letter (Cambridge University Press, 1995), 126.

[2] Stanley Porter, The Apostle Paul: His Life, Thought, and Letters (Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 2016), 302.

The post The Purpose of Romans appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

In modern Biblical studies, the problem of the interpretation of Pauline’s writing is one of the most disputable issues. In his book, Paul and His Recent Interpreters: Some Contemporary Debates, Wright critiques the major schools of thought in recent Pauline scholarship. The author provides a sophisticated and judicious analysis of the seminal works created by the most outstanding theological thinkers of the previous centuries. The list of the works included in the book is an extensive one, and it contains the representatives of the German school of theology such as Bultmann, Bornkamm, Conzelmann, Jeremias, Käsemann, Wrede, Schlatter, and Schweitzer. It also offers a comprehensive analysis of Sanders’s Paul and Palestinian Judaism and Meeks’s The First Urban Christians. The book contains three main parts that disclose three wide categories. The first part is defined by its author as the representation of Paul and his Jewish world, and it comprises chapters 1-4. The second part deals with Paul and ‘apocalyptic’ writing and is represented in chapter 5. Finally, chapters 6-10 depict Paul and his ‘social world.’ The current paper aims to analyze the bulk of literature connected with extensive Pauline writing, consider recent developments in Pauline scholarship, evaluate the current state of the discipline and the major schools of theological thought, and define the spheres of its practical application.

Section One: Pauline Scholarship during the Late Modern Period (Chapters 1–2)

The first part of the analyzed book is titled “Paul among Jews and Gentiles?” The author proves the claim by stating that Paul should be treated primarily as a figure of ancient history. However, while interpreting his works, it is necessary to avoid such dangers as anachronism and anatopism. By anachronism, the author meant thinking that people who lived many centuries ago saw the world and the relations between God and humans in the way modern people comprehend it.[1] In its turn, anatopism presupposes that people living in various locations have the same ideas of the world and the same outlook.[2] The initial studies of the Pauline heritage began at the end of the 19^th century. According to Wright, the most influential studies of the late nineteenth century created certain problems that modern scholarship has been trying to avoid.[3] These problems included ‘secularization’ or the process that initiated the representation of the ‘historical Paul’ as a ‘religious’ figure. The second problem is the Hegelian Idealism, which interpreted the concept and theory of ‘religion’ through the application of two broad hypothetical streams, namely Judaism and Hellenism. This problem stemmed from the original understanding of the concept of religion that was seen as the moments when a  separate individual or a group of people were in touch with the divinity through worshipping, invoking, or any other manifestations of the activities intended to celebrate its power. Such understanding of religion predetermined the main focus of interest typical for early researchers of Paul’s heritage. The scholars concentrated mainly on the analysis of Paul’s place within the ancient communities. They also intended to define whether the apostle was a Jewish or Hellenist thinker and whether his theological doctrine was meant for the Jewish or gentile audience. It is possible to argue that the mentioned issues created the canvas of the early scientific research of Pauline scholarship.

The first attempt to cope with the contradictions described above was made by Ferdinand Christian Baur, who became one of the most prominent representatives of the so-called  ‘Tübingen School’ that is commonly considered the best-known German theological and exegetical movements. Baur was one of the ardent supporters of the principles of Hegelian Idealism at the beginning of his theological career. The thinker stated that the traditional Christian concept of a transcendent personal God was outdated. Baur did not believe in divine revelation and denied the possibility of miracles as the manifestation of God’s intervention in human history. In this respect, he manifested himself as a supporter of the philosophic approach to theology.

In the middle of Baur’s career, the influence of the mentioned approach became stronger, and he concluded that traditional Christian views should be replaced by the philosophy of Hegel. In Baur’s opinion, Hegel’s views and theories provided the most comprehensive explanation of natural phenomena and the universe. It should be mentioned that in the last fifteen years of his life, Baur radically changed his views and began to reject the Hegelian abstract concept of God. For instance, he did not support the idea according to which  God should be understood as the form of the infinite Spirit and an eternal idea arising from its previous finite manifestation in the course of the developing process of history.[4] Even though Baur returned to rationalism that emphasized universal ethical principles as the meaning of life and the value of Christianity, his Hegelian orientation noticeable in earlier writings on Paul strongly influenced subsequent biblical studies.

The most influential article of Baur was published in 1831, and in it, the scholar laid out the foundations of his understanding of Paul’s theology. He also explained a unique approach to the history of the early Christian church by applying the evolutionary theory established by Hegelian philosophy.[5] Baur applied it to one of the most famous works of the apostle, namely to 1 Corinthians 1: 11-12.[6] Having based his conclusions on the mentioned text, Baur put forward the theory according to which there were two main directions of early Christianity. The first of them was called Judeo-Christianity. It remained within the framework of Judaism and Jewish national isolation and was based on the strict observation of the Law of Moses. Apostle Peter was the main figure in this direction of early Christianity. The second trend was defined as Gentile Christianity. It confessed Christianity as universal evangelism open to all nations that did not emphasize the importance of strictly following the Law of Moses. It also carried a great influence on Hellenism and the cultures associated with it. Paul was attributed as the main figure in this direction of early Christianity.

In his article, Baur stated that the Corinthian “party of Christ” was one of the Judeo-Christian factions that opposed the dominating influence of Paul. The theological doctrine of this party focused on Peter and emphasized its direct relationship with the historical Jesus through the original apostles established by Christ. Baur also argued that in opposition to the continued attacks of Judeo-Christian opponents, Paul developed the doctrine of justification by faith, which became central to his theology. Moreover, this initial and acute conflict between Peter and Paul directs the historical development of the church until the end of the second century, after which it was extinguished by the emerging unity of the hierarchical Catholic Church. The main approach supported by Baur is that Paul stood between the ‘early Jewish’ Christianity and the (later) ‘early catholic’ variety. Besides, Baur tried to prove that original texts written by Paul are only those in which the conflict between Petrine Judaeo-Christianity and Paulinist Gentile Christianity can be easily traced. According to the thinker, only four of Paul’s letters can be considered original, namely Romans, Galatians, and the two Corinthian epistles.[7] It should be mentioned that in the 20^th century, the majority of Baur’s ideas and theories were rejected by the researchers who denied the influence of the inner conflicts in early Christianity. They also offered an approach that emphasized the unifying influence of Paul.

Most New Testament scholars also did not accept Baur’s historical skepticism and his philosophical rationalism, which excluded the supernatural by definition. Despite the weakness of historical and theological judgment, Bauer’s consistent attempt to fully describe the history of the early church based on a purely historical approach without an appeal to miracles proved to be influential. The works of Baur marked the controversy between the teachings of Jesus and Paul’s theology. Even more critical contribution of Baur was his formulation of three key interrelated questions that were later addressed by the scholars of the subsequent epochs. The first question was about the opponents of Paul and the main concepts of the teachings. The second question was Paul’s theory concerning the law and its relationship to the gospel. The third issue was the main focus of Pauline’s theology. These three questions determined the subsequent direction of research.

Albert Schweitzer offered an innovative approach to Pauline debates more than a century ago. Schweitzer made an attempt to define the role of Paul in the development of early Christianity and his relation to Jesus. The scholar debated the view according to which Paul was seen as the Hellenizer or as a person who was a linking element between early Jewish Christianity and late Hellenistic Christianity. In Schweitzer’s opinion, Paul always remained Jewish, but his Judaism was an apocalyptic one, and it was characterized by its radical eschatology. The thinker wrote that the main achievement of Paul was providing Christianity a form that later enabled its Hellenizing.[8] Schweitzer also argues that the letter to Philemon is one of the most important works created by the apostle since it discloses all aspects of his personality. [9] It should be pointed out that the ideas offered by Schweitzer were innovative ones, and they were developed in the more recent research.

Section Two: The New Perspective on Paul (Chapters (3–5)

The new perspective on Paul’s scholarship is commonly associated with the works of Ed P. Sanders and especially with his famous book called Paul and Palestinian Judaism. This seminal book became the culmination of a long process of denial of the approach used in the Christian scholarship concerning Judaism. Sanders’ understanding of Judaism revolutionized the scientific understanding of Paul and his writings. The thinker believed that this religion should be characterized as covenantal nomism, meaning that the covenant given by God requires that people should obey the commandments that provide atonement for sins. He described Judaism as the religion of grace and characterized the Tora as the book, the rules of which should be obeyed because of gratitude and not fear or pride. The book created by Sanders is also based on the idea stating that Paul was a Jewish thinker and not a Hellenistic one.[10]The main conclusions made by the author of the mentioned work resonate with the Reformed tradition of theology. For Paul, there is a unity between the future, present, and past manifested in the notion of the verdict. The apostle stated that there would be a future verdict based on the total account of the life events.[11] This verdict should be anticipated in the present using the justification or the divine declaration represented by the belief in the gospel. At the same time, this notion is based on the past act when God vindicated Jesus by raising Him from the dead.[12] Sanders’ ideas also resonated with the exegetical scholarship, and this fact is often mentioned by the scholars criticizing his achievements. Finally, the analyzed book gained popularity due to its social and cultural location. Its author represented the world described by Wright as the new American ‘religious studies’[13] that embodied a new kind of Pauline investigation. Despite the undeniable influence the work of Sanders had on the development of the scholarship researching the legacy of the apostle, Wright indicates that “I believe he [Sanders] did not ground his thesis deep enough and seemed not to notice some of its weaknesses at that level.”[14] This citation proves that the author of the book has a critical attitude towards several aspects of the analyzed work, but he does not reject its importance and characterizes it as a real milestone of the new studies that shifted the old paradigm of the twentieth-century New Testament theology.

Since the early 1980s, several significant studies were published to re-evaluate the findings made by Sanders and define their impact on the research of Pauline scholarship. The works of Wayne Meeks, Krister Stendahl, and Martin Hengel became a matter of public discussion since they had a lasting impact on the mentioned sphere of knowledge. Still, the most important contribution was made by James Dunn, one of the pioneers of the new wave of scholars who offered their innovative perspective on Paul. Dunn is the author of numerous works that include Theology of Paul the Apostle, Christianity in the Making, a two-volume commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Galatians, Colossians, and Philemon. In these works, Dunn proves the thesis statement that Judaism of the first century was not legalistic. He also rejected the view according to which the antithesis of such concepts as law and grace should be treated as the main key to Paul’s understanding of the law and the theology of his opponents. In his recent article published in the volume The New Perspective on Paul: Collected Essays, Dunn attempts to prove that there is indeed a single ‘new view’ of Paul. [15] This approach is marked by the following attributive features:

• the term covenant nomism offered by Sanders is the one that accurately describes the structure of the first century Judaism;
• the law of Moses played the role of a social barrier since sanctification for God required separation from other nations;
• Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith was aimed to overcome the barrier that was placed by the law between Jews and gentiles since it presupposed the possibility of salvation for all people, irrespective of whether they were the Jews or belonged to other communities;
• Paul contrasts his doctrine of justification to simply following the commandments since many Christians believed that it was enough for receiving salvation.

In the next chapter of his work, Wright states that the 1990s were marked by the ardent confrontation between the supporters of the new view and classical Lutheran understanding of justification. The most outstanding works belong to such scholars as Simon Gathercole, Andrew Das, Seyoon Kim, Martin Hengel, Friedrich Avemarie, and Austin Farrer. The author indicates that the decline of the Bultmann School in Germany led to the rise of religious studies in Europe and North America that applied a variety of approaches.

Section Three: Apocalyptic Readings of Paul

According to Wright, apocalyptic readings of Paul became one of the main trends in interpreting the texts of the apostle. The first scholar who re-introduced the term ‘apocalyptic’ into the discourse of Pauline studies was Christiaan Beker. In his book, he wrote that the central motif of the Pauline works is the celebration of the divine victory manifested through the death and resurrection of Christ over the evil.[16] Besides, Beker understood apocalyptic writings as the beginning of the divine triumph and not as a negative strain typical for early Christian literature.[17] The other scholars who supported the apocalyptic approach included Ernst Kӓsemann and Klaus Koch. In his book, Wright indicates that Kӓsemann is one of the most outstanding researchers of Pauline scholarship.[18] Being the student of Rudolf Bultmann, Kӓsemann opposed the Gnosticism of his famous teacher. He believed that the application of the apocalyptic approach created a religion-historical matrix necessary for the proper interpretation of Paul’s ideas. One more achievement of Kӓsemann was his break with the Reformation tradition and representing Paul as a religious thinker who was influenced by the Jewish background.

The ideas voiced by Kӓsemann were later developed by Martinus de Boer and Louis Martyn. While commenting on their ideas, Wrights points out that both scholars understand Paul within a Jewish context. They read the phrase pistis Christou as a clear reference to Christ’s ‘faithfulness’ that reached its climax in his death.[19]According to the mentioned scholars, the most important questions of apocalyptic writing were the problems of responsibility for evil and finding rescue from evil.[20] Martyn also offered an innovative approach to the problem of defining the term apocalypse and arguing that it took place the moment Jesus died.[21] In the final chapter of this part, Wright analyzes the work written by Douglas Campbell and states that his book is full of numerous contradictions, and it does not provide a comprehensive understanding of the apocalyptic theory. To illustrate this claim, Wright writes that Campbell opposes a basically ‘Lutheran’ understanding of Paul, but at the same time, he represents the apostle as a Jewish-Christian ‘Teacher’ and as a turn-or-burn preacher.[22] The mentioned contradictions and the lack of systematic approach are seen by Wright as the major issues that prevented the scholar from the proper understanding of the main messages of Paul’s writings.

Section Four: Social-Cultural Studies of Paul and His World (Chapters 10–11)

In chapters 10 and 11, Wright provides the analysis of social-scientific studies of Pauline heritage. According to the author, the study of the New Testament within the framework of its social paradigm reached its highest swing in the early 1980s, even though the roots of this approach have a much longer history.[23] One of the first scholars who insisted on the use of the mentioned approach to the New Testament was Gerd Theissen, who offered the idea of sociological exegesis and was deeply dissatisfied with the interpretation of the Bible as the book that represents only theology and ethics.

The ideas formulated by Theissen were supported by other researchers, namely Emil Schürer and his History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ and Ed Sanders and his Judaism: Practice and Belief. These works offer the representation of Paul as a religious leader who stood on the crossroads between the non-Jewish world and the wider Jewish world of the diaspora.[24] One more important work that became a trigger of the modern interest in social studies of Christianity was Edwin Judge’s book, The Social Pattern of Christian Groups in the First Century. The judge provided a detailed description of the Roman world in the period of late antiquity, and placing the history of early Christianity into a wide paradigm is an advantage of the mentioned study. Several conclusions made by Judge are of particular importance.

First of all, his distancing of Christians from the other religious societies of the analyzed epoch is an innovative idea that deserves careful analysis. The judge pointed out that Christians did not practice animal sacrifices, did not have a system of hierarchical priesthood, and did not build impressive sacred buildings. The second conclusion made by the scholar is that Christians were innovators who undermined the molds of the societies they lived in. They were in constant confrontation with the Greco-Roman world, offering an alternative system of the transnational society. [25]The works of Judge and Theissen are commonly considered as the most outstanding books representing the early stage of the modern movement for sociological approaches.

More recent works were created by the members of the Society of Biblical Literature operating in the United States. Its most famous members included Wayne Meeks and John Gager. The other scholars who made a significant contribution to the development of the sociological approach were Bruce Malina, Jerome Neyrey, John H. Elliott, Philip F. Esler, and Robert Jewett. It should be mentioned that under the general term of social approach, Wright means such main categories as description, explanation, prediction, and application.[26] The scholar states that the examples illustrating the mentioned categories can be found in the works of the American researchers, but description remains a dominating method of representing the material related to early Christianity.

In the next chapter of his book, Wright concentrates on the detailed analysis of the works created by Wayne Meeks, whose influence on the social studies of Pauline’s writings was the most noticeable one. The scholar wrote The First Urban Christians as the reaction to the dominating idea according to which Judaism and Hellenism were two incomparable movements separated by two different doctrines. According to Meeks, it was a wrong idea since, in the ancient world, communities could not exist separately without an interchange of information.[27] In the introduction to his book, the researcher demonstrates the interconnection of the cities in which Paul lived and taught with the rural environment and the broadness of the Roman Empire. Then the scholar proceeds to the analysis of the central issue of all sociological studies that he formulates as the social level of Paul’s churches.

Having read the impressive number of resources, Meeks concludes that these communities comprised not only poor people. They served as examples of “a fair cross-section of urban society.”[28] It means that the members of Paul’s churches belonged to different social classes and represented various origins, professions, and levels of wealth. Meeks also offered the idea according to which early Christian communities can be described as local tightly-knit groups the members of which separated themselves from the other religious organizations by practicing monotheism and a strict code of morality. Having commented on the significance of Meeks’ contribution, Wright indicates that this scholar characterized Paul as the person who saw his main aim as “spearheading the scripturally rooted and messianically focused new movement of God.”[29]

The other achievements of the researcher include shifting the focus from the history of religion to the broader understanding of historical processes that took place in the ancient world and the representation of the question of belief within a wide paradigm of the worldview. The next book analyzed by Wright in the chapter is David Horrell’s Solidarity and Difference. The main advantages of this book include comprehensive research of such concepts as boundaries, purity, and identity. This book also offers commentaries on the various models that can be applied to the analysis of Pauline’s writings. These models include communitarian, mediating, and liberal ones. Horrell argues that all of them can be used by scholars, but neither can reflect a complex character of Pauline’s heritage. Still, according to Wright, Horrell’s book is one of the most significant works representing the social-historical approach.

Section Five: Personal Assessment    

It is possible to argue that it is one of the most comprehensive studies reflecting all possible aspects and approaches applied to the research of Apostle Paul’s writings. Wright comments on more than a hundred various books and articles published within the 20^th century and demonstrates both their advantages and drawbacks. The bibliography of the book is extremely extensive, and it represents the authors who worked in Germany, Australia, and the United States. Their contribution is difficult to underestimate, but despite a variety of the used sources, Wright manages to create the methodology that enables him to group the authors by the theories they represent. It is also important that the scholar can spot out the ideas that dominated a certain generation of researchers.

The author of the analyzed book also concludes that all real breakthroughs in Pauline’s studies stemmed from the people’s dissatisfaction with the previously dominating approaches. For instance, the New Perspective on Paul developed as a negative reaction to the improper representation of Judaism as the religion that significantly impacted the development of Christianity. Kӓsemann’s approach can be interpreted as the opposition against Bultmannian existentialism with its inward-looking concentration. Finally, social-historical approaches that dominated the scientific thought of the end of the 20^th century appeared as the reaction to the abstract theology of the word with its lack of practical application. In this way, the author emphasizes the idea that Pauline’s studies can be characterized as the ones having evolutionary development.

While it is impossible to deny that all of the studies included in Wright’s book have certain benefits, their main problem is the limited character in terms of concentration on a certain idea and failing to notice the significance of other approaches. This claim can be easily illustrated by the following example. The approach that seems to be the most applicable to Pauline’s writings in modern times is the social-historical one. It has its clear objective and methodology; the research tasks are easy to understand, and they have a particular practical value. At the same time, it is not clear why the research of historical factors and circumstances influencing the apostle and the churches established by him cannot be compared with the serious linguistic analysis of his writings. In any way, language is the reflection of culture, and a wise concentration on the theology of words will bring extra information that can be effectively used by scholars.

Besides, modern studies seem to ignore the biographical approach to the research of the heritage of the apostle. In the whole volume, there is not a single mentioning of the main life events that shape Paul as one of the most influential leaders of Christianity. Modern scholars do not pay any attention to the fact that Paul was an extremely complex personality who refused his social, religious, and cultural background when he sincerely believed in Jesus Christ. It seems that a careful biographical analysis with the use of modern methods of research can significantly contribute to the development of Pauline scholarship and its popularization. However, at present, the biographical approach is one of the areas that remain underexplored and need further attention of the scholars.

There is also one more moment that is emphasized by Wright and should be supported. This moment is the negative attitude to reductionism that impacts the understanding of Paul’s role in the development of Christianity. As the scholar writes, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither apocalyptic nor salvation history, neither participation nor justification: all are one in the Messiah.”[30] It is possible to argue that this citation is the central message of the analyzed book, and it transmits its comprehensive character. The author convincingly proves his main thesis and demonstrates that the research of Pauline writings and their influence on the development of Christianity is a promising sphere of future research that has considerable potential and allows an unlimited number of interpretations. Finally, it is important to mention that the analyzed volume is a part of the work called Paul and the Faithfulness of God in which the author offered his understanding of the apostle’s heritage. Consequently, it is wise to read them together to get a proper idea of Wright’s theological theory and his contribution to the Pauline scholarship.

Bibliography

Wright, Nicholas Thomas. Paul and His Recent Interpreters: Some Contemporary Debates. Fortress Press, 2015.

[1] Nicholas Thomas Wright, Paul and His Recent Interpreters: Some Contemporary Debates (Fortress Press, 2015), 3.

[2] Ibid., 3.

[3] Ibid., 6.

[4] Ibid., 7.

[5] Ibid., 7.

[6] Ibid., 7.

[7] Ibid., 8.

[8] Ibid., 30.

[9] Ibid., 32.

[10] Ibid., 66.

[11] Ibid., 72.

[12] Ibid., 72.

[13] Ibid., 68.

[14] Ibid., 74.

[15] Ibid., 97.

[16] Ibid., 135.

[17] Ibid., 150.

[18] Ibid., 145.

[19] Ibid., 156.

[20] Ibid., 159.

[21] Ibid., 171.

[22] Ibid., 200.

[23] Ibid, 225.

[24] Ibid., 228.

[25] Ibid., 232.

[26] Ibid., 236.

[27] Ibid., 258.

[28] Ibid., 263.

[29] Ibid., 269.

[30] Ibid., 345.

The post Pauline Interpreters appeared first on Students of Scriptures.

The modern-day Christians live in a new time dispensation, where grace supersedes the law. The atonement through the death of Christ led to the abolishment of the york of the law of Moses, accounting for the contrast between the two dispensations. The content of the old testament aligns with the events and doctrines relevant to the saints living during the age. Similarly, the content of the New Testament aligns with issues that emerged after the death of Jesus Christ. Despite the strong evidence of the distinction between the Old and New Testaments, the Bible indicates that all scripture is God-breath and is profitable for teaching, correcting, rebuking, and for training.[1] It is, therefore, imperative to establish a correct interpretation and legitimate application in the lives of Christians. This reflection presents a perspective of teaching or preaching through the lens of both the old and New Testaments.

The distinctions between the New and Old Testament laws in regards to the practices and doctrinal requirements have been highlighted in Block’s analysis in chapter 3 and 4. Preaching based solely on the old testament principles may not be relevant to people living in the contemporary setting, however, integration of the New Testament concepts can lead to a sound understanding of the key issues under analysis.[2] The perspectives for teaching interpretation and legitimate application of both the New and Old Testament could be presented through the analysis of the symbolic events and practices alongside the corresponding interpretations in the New Testament.

The life and death of Jesus Christ depicted myriads of symbols that correlate with old testament occurrences. Cognizant of the confusion that may arise among the followers, Christ pointed out that he had not come to abolish the law, but to bring them to accomplishment.[3] If indeed, Christ came to fulfill the law of Moses, then the events traversing the old testament bear a relationship with that in the life of Jesus. The points of symbolic references for this analysis include the atonement practice, the ten commandments, and access to the holiest place.

Atonement practice is evident in both the New and Old Testaments. In the old testament, the Israelites needed to undergo cleansing to purge their sins. The high priests bore the responsibility of making blood sacrifices, after which, a scapegoat was released into the wilderness, to carry away the sins of the people. In that manner, Israelites were considered clean and redeemed from their sins. The coming of Christ symbolized redemption from sins. John the Baptist described Jesus as the lamb that would take away the sins of the world.[4] Similarly, the gospel, according to John, pointed at God’s love towards the earth demonstrated through the issuance of His only begotten son to save humankind. Christ died, and atonement was made for the sins of the world. The death of Christ replaced the sacrificial lambs slaughtered in the old testament and the scapegoat that took away sins into the wilderness.

The ten commandments were a manifestation of righteousness that God desired from the Israelites. The gist of the commandments was to develop a reverence for God and righteous living among the people. In the old testament dispensation, the commandments epitomized the norms and code of conduct expected of God’s people. After the coming of Jesus Christ, a new manifestation of righteousness emerged, where Christ summed up the 10 commandments into the law of love. In his teachings, Christ commanded the people to love their neighbor as they would love themselves. The concept of love has also been emphasized by apostle Paul when he pointed out that all things are in vain without love; whether there are prophecies, speaking in strange tongues, healing, and other forms of miracles, without love, they are all performed in vain. Thus, the goal of the ten commandments was to establish righteousness among the people. In the new dispensation, Christ attained righteousness through the practice of love demonstrated between people.

The final concept is the access to the holiest place. In the old testament, the holy of holies was only accessed by the priests who communed with God on behalf of the people. In cases where the priests would approach the holiest place with sins in their hearts, God would strike them down to death. The coming of Christ led to the opening of access to the holiest place. Through the death of Christ, people gained access to God without the need for priests as mediators. The symbol for this action was the breaking of the vail that separated the holiest place in the temple. The splitting of the temple veil marked a new dispensation where anyone can approach the throne of God to obtain mercy and forgiveness.

Through the coming of Jesus Christ, a new approach to righteousness, sins cleansing, and communion with God was revealed. The laws of Moses sought to uphold the practice of righteousness and to teach people to love God. The coming of Jesus Christ augmented the theme by teaching people how to love one another and have reverence for God. People also have access to God through prayer, leading to improved divine relationships. Old Testament teaching, therefore, bears a strong correlation with that of the New Testament. Any teaching or preaching should consider the symbolic significance of the practices to enable attachment of the correct meaning. As confusion arises on the application of the old testament scriptures, the symbolic significance of the events and practices can be related and used as a basis for analyzing each occurrence. Besides, the evidence in the current reflection shows that the differences between the old and New Testament practices dwell on principles attributed to the different dispensations.

Bibliography

2 Timothy 3:16-17

Block, Daniel Isaac. The Gospel According to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy. 2. 1st ed. Vol. 2. 1. Eugene, OR, NY: Cascade Books, 2012.

John 1:29

Matthew 5:17

[1] 2 Timothy 3:16-17

[2] Daniel Isaac Block, The Gospel According to Moses: Theological and Ethical Reflections on the Book of Deuteronomy, 1st ed., vol. 2 (Eugene, OR, NY: Cascade Books, 2012), 46.

[3] Matthew 5:17

[4] John 1:29

The post A Reflection on Old and New Testament Teachings appeared first on Students of Scriptures.