Top 12 of CiHD: #5

For a summary of what I’m hoping to accomplish in this blog series (the first week of every month of 2018), I recommend reviewing my explanation here.

We’re getting closer and closer to the most-viewed post in the history of my blog! This month in the Top 12 Blog Posts at Covered in His Dust, we’ll look at the fifth-most-viewed post. It was a post titled “JUDE: False Teachers” — and you can find it here.

In this series, as we look at each post, I want to ask three questions: why, what, and what else? Why do I think this post got so many views; why were others drawn to it? What do I hope people found when they got here; what do I hope they heard? Finally, what else have I learned about this; what else would I say about these ideas?

WHY THIS POST?

For me, seeing this post on the list makes sense on many levels. While I don't know if there is a single reason that predominantly drove the number of views, I would guess it is a combination of both of the following (and maybe others).

First, I think Jude is a book shrouded in mystery for many Bible students. This short letter raises so many questions for those who dare to dig in to the details that it has to be a book people are Googling and searching for left and right. What is this reference about the body of Moses? Why the fascination with Enoch? Why does it feel like there are so many things going on “behind the scenes” with the book of Jude? While we talked about much of this in the original post, I’m sure it’s driving a lot of interest in finding posts and articles discussing the content of Jude.

Second, I think anytime you write a post titled “False Teachers” in our day and age of Evangelicalism, you are going to get some views. We have such an unhealthy (most of the time) fascination with doctrinal correctness and those who color outside the lines that Christian readers go a little gaga over the need to categorize people into one group or another. As we’ve chatted about before, the concern, as we are familiar with it, is not one that existed in the apostolic age and mainly arose as the result of losing our Jewish roots as a movement and dealing with the impact of the Gnostic Crisis in the second century and beyond. But let’s pull some of that apart below.

WHAT DO I HOPE THEY FOUND?

Some might ask, “How in the world can you say this wasn’t a concern in the apostolic age when the book of Jude (and others!) write about the need to be aware of false teachers?!”

This is where the irony runs thick. In the New Testament, a thoughtful examination of the arguments against false teachers will reveal that the danger is not in its orthodoxy, but in the orthopraxy. Obviously, the orthodoxy is important; without a doubt, the content of teaching drives our behavior. But the danger of the teaching is not in what it gets wrong, but in how it leads us to live. Consider the constant rebuke that exists from the Evangelical Doctrine Police of the world today. Is there any concern for the “living out” of a theologian’s position? Do we write posts ad nauseam about whether or not a teacher demonstrates the fruit of the Spirit in their life?

No. Too often, the lifestyle of a teacher and the fruit that comes out of his or her ministry is not the source of critique or the concern of those so driven to a flurry. They are worked up about the theological accuracy of a belief. They are worried about how it lines up against a creed or a statement of faith. But this is not what concerned the authors of the New Testament. What concerned them was that a person’s theology led them to be exclusive and inhospitable. It caused them not to show love to others and led them to pursue self-indulgence rather than selfless generosity. This kind of behavior was seen as a grave threat to the gospel. In the letters of John, this criticism was about whether or not a teacher led his students to be more loving. In Jude, the concern is that the teaching leads to debauchery and self-indulgence.

In all instances, the writers spend zero time critiquing the theology that lies behind the behavior; they spend their time critiquing the fruit of the tree itself. This is a thought that I hope people found when they got to this post.

WHAT ELSE WOULD I SAY?

I’m not sure I would add much else to this post over I’ve said above. I really do wish we (in the world of western theology) can demonstrate a greater ability to navigate this conversation in a way that mirrors the teaching of the Apostles and writers of the New Testament. This isn’t just an idea that shows up in writings about false teachers. It’s not just a theme we find in John, Peter, and Jude. As mentioned above, it’s also present in the teachings Paul. But maybe most importantly, it was a theme in the teachings of Jesus.

Jesus told us himself that you cannot pick grapes from thorn bushes or figs from thistles. Jesus said that something can look one way on the outside, but the fruit is what gives it away. It might look like a chicken, but if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and lays duck eggs — we have a duck. It appears that his disciples understood this and later applied it to their experiences with false teachers. They were not primarily concerned with whether the words were right. They were more concerned with whether or not it (i.e., the teacher and his students) looked like Jesus.

It seems we have a lot to learn about whether or not our actions look like Jesus; Evangelicals are having to spend more and more time trying to explain why they are right because the words are correct. We seem to be spending an awful lot of time arguing about appropriate interpretations of Romans 13 and visions of heaven with walls. I think people like Jude would look right at it and say, “That’s easy. I don’t care what your words say; however you’re living out the words doesn’t look at all like Jesus.” I think Jude would find a lot of false teaching.

REVELATION: Ephesus and Their First Love

The first “letter” written within the book of Revelation is the letter to the church in Ephesus. Many scholars have pointed out that the order of the seven churches comes in the order the postal delivery route traveled in the first century. The letter begins in Ephesus, for that is where the letter is most likely penned. This is where the apostle John ended up being stationed as the “Pastor to Asia,” and Church tradition holds that he lived here with Mary (the mother of Jesus).

Ephesus was written about by some as “the head of the snake” in reference to the Christian movement. While many people speak of Antioch being the headquarters of Christianity, this was only a reality for a small period of time. As this early movement exploded throughout the world of biblical Asia and Asia Minor, Ephesus (the second largest city in the Roman empire) was centrally located and became the likely port city for the movement to call its home. Because of this, one of the battles Ephesus constantly had to fight was that of false apostles, false teaching, and all kinds of bad orthopraxy.

This appears to be something they handled quite well, at least if the letter to Ephesus is any indication. Let’s look at that now.

“To the angel of the church in Ephesus write:

These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands. I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. You have persevered and have endured hardships for my name, and have not grown weary.

Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken the love you had at first. Consider how far you have fallen! Repent and do the things you did at first. If you do not repent, I will come to you and remove your lampstand from its place. But you have this in your favor: You hate the practices of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give the right to eat from the tree of life, which is in the paradise of God.”

You can see John mentions more than once their faithfulness and endurance in the realm of not tolerating wicked people, of testing things for the act of discernment. John also references the Nicolaitans. From what we know in history, our best understanding of the Nicolaitans is that they were a group of people who proposed full engagement with the pagan Roman culture. Probably influenced by the same Gnostic heresies the New Testament writers are often battling, these false believers had proposed that one could engage the pagan practices in the flesh, while keeping their spirit pure and totally devoted to God.

In a sense, it would be like somebody crossing their fingers behind their back while they offer incense to pagan gods. The explanation goes something like this: “I’m not truly worshipping those gods. God knows what’s in my heart.” And what is so damning for many of us is how much we find that thinking prevalent in our own lives and hearts — if we are willing to look closely.

There are many other details in the letter to Ephesus we simply don’t have clear ideas on from history. It is the wrong church letter to teach the greater principles about the methodology of John in Revelation, so we’ll keep moving in order to see those principles more clearly. However, rest assured that we won’t be leaving the overall discussion about Ephesus, but only the letter in chapter two. Since Ephesus was the place where the letter was penned, we will find its culture and imagery come up over and over again as we study.

Don’t fret. We’ll return to Ephesus in good time.

2 JOHN: the "Woman"

John pens another letter, sent to a curious character.

The elder,

To the lady chosen by God and to her children, whom I love in the truth—and not I only, but also all who know the truth—because of the truth, which lives in us and will be with us forever: 

Grace, mercy and peace from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, the Father’s Son, will be with us in truth and love.

John sends this to a “chosen lady.” This leaves us with a few options.

John could be addressing this letter to an actual woman and her children. This letter could very easily be written to a particular woman in Asia or Asia Minor (or elsewhere for that matter) and we are getting to see a very personal correspondence from John to her. It is entirely possible that any effort to come up with another explanation is simply overthinking the situation.

John could be addressing a certain body of believers (a church) as a woman. This would be entirely commonplace as the Church is often pictured as a bride, the outlying villages of a larger city as “daughters,” etc. To bolster this idea, there is the fact that when “she” is referenced in the rest of the letter, John uses the masculine Greek to address the recipient(s). This would not be expected in a personal correspondence.

It could very possibly be both. This could be a letter written to a particular woman with allegorical (whether intentional or unintentional) overtones, but we have already witnessed John’s incredible ability as an author to operate on multiple levels. Another very good possibility is that the “woman” in question is also the leader of a house church or an even larger body of believers in that area. In this regard, John would be writing to her, but intending the letter for a larger audience, as well.

It has given me great joy to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as the Father commanded us. And now, dear lady, I am not writing you a new command but one we have had from the beginning. I ask that we love one another. And this is love: that we walk in obedience to his commands. As you have heard from the beginning, his command is that you walk in love.

John rejoices because he has heard as the “Pastor to Asia” about her faith and how she lives it out. He has heard she walks in truth and, as we discovered in 1 John, this means she is walking in love. Without love, there would be no truth in her or her family; but she is a family of love and, therefore, she is walking in truth.

I say this because many deceivers, who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh, have gone out into the world. Any such person is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch out that you do not lose what we have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully. Anyone who runs ahead and does not continue in the teaching of Christ does not have God; whoever continues in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not take them into your house or welcome them. Anyone who welcomes them shares in their wicked work.

Could these “deceivers” be the (possible) Gnostics of John’s address in his first letter? Could these deceivers be those “Judeans” who followed Paul throughout Asia, and especially Asia Minor, opposing his gospel? Could they be legalistic believers who are attempting to disengage the culture and hold up in a corner? Could they be the Nicolaitans of Revelation? Any of these are great options and would fit the bill described above.

I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete. 

The children of your sister, who is chosen by God, send their greetings.

Finally, John’s sign-off seems to suggest that the latter two options above may be at play here, as the phrasing is awkward if we are talking about actual individuals. But before we look ahead to 3 John, I always like to pause and consider: If John were to write a letter about our family, “to the chosen lady” whom we find ourselves children of, what would be said? Would John rejoice in hearing that we walk in the truth because of our commitment to love?

1 JOHN: Love and Truth

We’ve mentioned before that John moved to biblical Asia to help lead the growing church in the larger Greco-Roman world. Known as the “Pastor to Asia,” John was an expert (as we’ve seen in his gospel) in talking to the audience in Asia and Asia Minor. We have record in the writings of Polycarp (John’s disciple) that the churches in Asia are using this letter, which is being circulated among them.

It could be that this letter is written in order to combat a Gnostic heresy similar to what we studied in the book of Colossians. Known as “Docetism” — a belief that argued against the humanity of Jesus and claimed he never really came in the flesh — there are many statements in John’s first letter that would make sense if he’s arguing for a physical incarnation and a Jesus who took on flesh.

Nevertheless, my favorite part of the letter of 1 John is his insistence on loving each other. In 1, 2, and 3 John, one of the themes you can see running through these letters is the theme of love and truth, and it’s never stronger than in 1 John.

The letter starts with what sounds like an Essene teaching. In the Dead Sea Scrolls, we found references to teachings of the Essenes that taught about the “sons of light” and the “sons of darkness.” To walk in obedience to God’s path and God’s way was to walk in the light; to oppose God’s ways was to be a “son of darkness.” We previously explored the strong connections to the Essenes that Jesus may have had, and it’s hard to miss the possibility here in the first chapter:

This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.

In continued Essene-like fashion, the letter goes on to speak about how one can discern between people who walk in the light and those who do not. Whoever claims to follow Jesus would live life the way Jesus lived life. This would make sense if we remember studying what it meant to follow a rabbi.

We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. Whoever says, “I know him,” but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. But if anyone obeys his word, love for God is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.

This entire conversation raises a question of John: How did Jesus walk, and what is the defining characteristic of being true to the way of Jesus?

Anyone who claims to be in the light but hates a brother or sister is still in the darkness. Anyone who loves their brother and sister lives in the light, and there is nothing in them to make them stumble. But anyone who hates a brother or sister is in the darkness and walks around in the darkness. They do not know where they are going, because the darkness has blinded them.

John seems to be very clear on the issue of what it means to be a son of light. To walk in the way of God, as seen in the life and teachings of Jesus, is to be a person who loves. If you do not love, you do not walk in the light. As if this couldn’t be more clear, John won’t let this idea go — the entire third chapter revolves around this argument. We continue to see this argument all the way into the fourth chapter:

God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the day of judgment: In this world we are like Jesus. There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.We love because he first loved us.  

Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen. And he has given us this command: Anyone who loves God must also love their brother and sister.

It has often been said in the world I minister in that we have to maintain a balance between love and truth. We have to be loving, but we cannot give up on truth. John, I believe, would suggest we have that conversation entirely backwards. If you are not loving, then what you have is not true — period. Love is what makes it true. In a world that wants to demand we hold to truth in order to show the world what God is like, we simply need to read more of chapter 4:

Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

The way we can show the world an accurate, true picture of what God looks like, is to love. We can have all the theology and doctrine imaginable — truth stacked up in books — yet if we don’t have love, John says it’s a lie. This might sound a lot like Paul who claimed that if we have all knowledge, but don’t have love, we are nothing more than “a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.”

Whoever claims to be in Him must walk as Jesus walked. Above all else, Jesus loved. May we strive to do the same.

COLOSSIANS: Gnostic Heresy

Paul also pens a letter to the church in Colossae, a small city off the main road that runs through Hierapolis and Laodicea. I’ve always found the conversation that surrounds Colossae moving, because this church is the recipient of one of Paul’s letters, and yet the entire city doesn’t survive but a few decades after the establishment of the church. We have mentioned before the many earthquakes that decimated cities throughout the Roman empire. Many of these cities would be central to Roman infrastructure; unfortunately for the people of Colossae, their city did not make the list. The earthquakes of the AD 60s leveled the city, and it was never rebuilt. To this day, the tel of Colossae — a small hill in the Turkish countryside — sits unexcavated, if not nearly forgotten.

The unexcavated tel of Colossae

From a literary perspective, Colossians mirrors the structure of Ephesians point by point. Most scholars believe they were penned together. While Paul didn’t have the ability to use the “copy and paste” function, he definitely uses the same literary technique in the two letters. Here’s what I mean.

Ephesians is six chapters long and Colossians is a little shorter at four chapters. If you look at the first half of both letters, you will notice that Paul talks theology, or what I like to call ‘orthodoxy’ (removed form it’s cultural usage, the etymology of the term refers to “right belief”). The last half of each letter speaks very deliberately of ‘orthopraxy’ (“right practice or behavior”). If you compare Ephesians 4–6 to Colossians 3–4, you will see an identical pattern. Paul speaks about household behavior as it relates to husbands and wives, parents and children, and masters and servants.

It’s the first half of the letters that differ in content. This is because of the context of the recipients. I say that based on assumption because there is so much we don’t know about Colossae (since it lies unexcavated). What we do know comes from the few finds that were scattered along the fields of the local farmers and other things like currency. However, one of the things that seems apparent is the struggle in Colossae with the dangerous teachings of Gnosticism.

Now, the moment you begin talking about Gnosticism, you have entered into tricky waters, because the word can refer to so much and a student of philosophy and Greek belief has many strong opinions about the topic. I’m no expert, so I’ll quote one of my favorite excerpts on the issue from NT Wright. In Surprised by Hope (p. 88), Wright describes Gnosticism as it relates to biblical theology:

For Plato, the present world of space, time, and matter is a world of illusion, of flickering shadows in a cave, and the most appropriate human task is to get in touch with the true reality, which is beyond space, time, and matter. For Plato, this was the reality of eternal Forms.

To oversimplify once more, we may say that Plato’s picture was based on a rejection of the phenomena of matter and transience. The mess and muddle of the space-time-matter world was an offense to the tidy, clean, philosophical mind, which dwelt upon eternal realities. […]

The Platonic strain entered Christian thinking early on, not least with the phenomenon known as Gnosticism. Since the Gnostics have been making something of a comeback recently, a word about them is appropriate. The Gnostics believed, like Plato, that the material world was an inferior and dark place, evil in its very existence, but that within this world could be found certain people who were meant for something else. […] The Gnostic myth often suggests that the way out of our mess is to return to our primeval state, before the creation of the world. In this view creation itself is the fall, producing matter, which is the real evil. I hope it is clear both how closely this view parodies some aspects of Christianity and how deeply and thoroughly it diverges from it.

Wright will go on to explain how some Bible students will go to great lengths to show how some elements of this thought are preserved in the New Testament, but he will spend the rest of the chapter showing how dangerous this way of thinking is to biblical theology.

Paul seems to agree. His first half of the letter to the Colossians talks very directly about this false idea propped up by Gnosticism. Consider the following passage:

He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Notice the tense of the statement. Paul says not that God will deliver us, but that He has. The next verses continue even further into this.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

Paul makes sure to use the most inclusive language possible for the incarnation and reconciliation of all things. He speaks of all things and makes sure to clarify that these are from heaven and on earth, visible and invisible. He speaks of how all these things were created through him. He speaks of how all of creation is held together in him. And, for good measure, adds that the complete fullness of God dwelt in the Christ.

Paul will go to play with this idea in the second chapter, at times very tongue-in-cheek.

It certainly behooves the Church today to consider the words of Wright above, that these Gnostic ideas “deeply and thoroughly diverges from” the teachings of the Apostles. The truth is that far too much Gnosticism has crept into Christian theology. The idea that we are spirits trapped in prisons of flesh, walking in a world that is doomed to destruction, just waiting for “some glad morning,” is not the mission God called us to and is not congruent with the teachings of Jesus, let alone Paul and the New Testament.

The Kingdom of God is here — deeply engaged with this world of flesh and blood, soil and spirit.