Becoming Whole and Holy

The purpose of salvation is to make whole that which is broken. The Christian spiritual journey settles for nothing less than such wholeness. But genuine wholeness cannot occur apart from holiness. In The Holiness of God, R. C. Sproul notes that the pattern of God’s transforming encounters with humans is always the same. God appears; humans respond with fear because of their sin; God forgives our sins and heals us (holiness and wholeness); God then sends us out to serve him. This means that holiness and wholeness are the interrelated goals of the Christian spiritual journey. Holiness is the goal of the spiritual journey because God is holy and commands that we be holy (Leviticus 11:44).

Holiness involves taking on the life and character of a holy God by means of a restored relationship to him. This relationship heals our most fundamental disease—our separation from our Source, our Redeemer, the Great Lover of our soul. This relationship is therefore simultaneously the source of our holiness and of our wholeness.

Human beings were designed for intimate relationship with God and cannot find fulfillment of their true and deepest self apart from that relationship. Holiness does not involve the annihilation of our identity with a simple transplant of God’s identity. Rather, it involves the transformation of our self, made possible by the work of God’s Spirit within us. Holiness is becoming like the God with whom we live in intimate relationship. It is acquiring his Spirit and allowing spirit to be transformed by Spirit. It is finding and living our life in Christ, and then discovering that Christ’s life and Spirit are our life and spirit. This is the journey of Christian spiritual transformation. This is the process of becoming whole and holy.

 - David G. Benner, Sacred Companions: The Gift of Spiritual Friendship Direction, 2009.

We Are Rebels

You see, in our time we have over-emphasized the psychology of the sinner’s condition. We spend much time describing the woe of the sinner, the grief of the sinner and the great burden he carries. He does have all of these, but we have over-emphasized them until we forget the principal fact—that the sinner is actually a rebel against properly constituted authority! 

That is what makes sin, sin. We are rebels. We are sons of disobedience. Sin is the breaking of the law and we are in rebellion and we are fugitives from the just laws of God while we are sinners.
 
So it is with sinners. Certainly they are heartbroken and they carry a heavy load. Certainly they labor and are heavy-laden. The Bible takes full account of these things; but they are incidental to the fact that the reason the sinner is what he is, is because he has rebelled against the laws of God and he is a fugitive from divine judgement.

- Tozer, A. W., I Call It Heresy

Understanding Sin

Another way to calculate the importance of a biblical understanding of sin is through the use of a series of theological continua. For example, a high view of humanity (humans are basically good morally) and our capacity for good typically maintains a low view of sin’s serious effects upon humanity. Alternately, a heightened view of sin (humans are radically depraved) will result in a reduced view of human capacity for spiritual good.

The theological understanding of Christ’s work is also impacted by one’s view of sin. A milder view of sin tends to parallel a nonpunitive view of the atonement. When the cross is viewed as an answer to the wrath of God, a clearly heightened view of sin (human helplessness before a holy God) is the presupposition.

God’s grace is another area directly impacted by one’s view of sin. The more sinful we appear to ourselves, the more we recognize the strategic nature of God’s grace. In the matter of soteriology, a positive view of human ability coupled with an optimistic view of the human condition depreciates the need for salvation and opens the door for alternate interpretations of the nature of our deliverance from sin (e.g., liberationist definitions of salvation as deliverance from political, sexual, or racial exploitation). In terms of conversion, repentance and faith are directly related to the nature of sin. Thus, do we have the capacity to repent and believe, or are these capacities granted to us at conversion?

Finally, as became clear to Augustine, one’s view of predestination is impacted by one’s view of sin. A more severe view of sin prompts a more pronounced understanding of predestination and election. Alternately, modifications to God’s free unconditional election (conditional election, for example) are supported by a less stringent view of human depravity.
 

- John W. Mahony, “A Theology of Sin for Today,” in Fallen: 

A Theology of Sin, eds.  Christopher. W. Morgan & Robert A. Peterson, 2013.

The Reality of Sins

The strategic importance of sin theologically and practically prompts us to ask about the nature of sin itself. Typically, post-fall definitions of sin (that is, those that reflect our fallen condition) come from either lexical analyses of the biblical words or from the various biblical images for sin (such as disease, defilement, or debt). Christian confessional statements, articles of faith, and systematic theologies contain definitions that have been coalesced from biblical usage and historical precedents. 

More recent efforts to define sin, however, reflect the existential and realist contexts of the last century: “[Sin] is universal, tragic estrangement, based on freedom and destiny in all human beings, and shall never be used in the plural. Sin is separation, estrangement from one’s essential being.” Existentially, sin is a deep sense of dread or anxiety, the tension that arises from our finitude and the openness of the future.

The trend away from more objective statements about sin tends to cloud the issue of sin’s essence. Compared to the existential, man-centered approach to sin, classic doctrinal statements such as the Westminster Larger Catechism defined sin with a clear reference to God and his law: “Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature.” Within the Roman Catholic tradition, Thomas Aquinas defined sin as “a word, deed, or desire which is against the eternal law.” John Calvin defined sin as “unfaithfulness.”10 James Arminius claimed that sin is “something thought, spoken, or done against the law of God, or the omission of something which has been commanded by that law to be thought, spoken or done.”

Each of these definitions captures the essential meaning of sin as a violation of God’s law, covenant, or will. They also reflect a traditional understanding of the historicity of Adam and interpret the account of the fall in Genesis 3 quite literally. Consequently, sin is viewed more in relation to God. The perspective, however, is still post-fall.

A. H. Strong defined sin as the “lack of conformity to the moral law of God, either in act, disposition, or state.” In a subsequent clarification of the definition, he declared: “It therefore considers lack of conformity to the divine holiness in disposition or state as a violation of law, equally with the outward act of transgression.”

 “Lack of conformity,” however, is only true of humankind after the fall of Adam; the expression cannot be applied either to Adam before the fall or to the incarnate Son of God. From a pre-fall perspective, the essential nature of sin is expressed in a single act of rebellion; from a post-fall perspective, the violation of God’s law is only one component among innumerable others.

In regard to the post-fall perspective, then, sin possesses many different facets and expressions. The Scripture also uses an array of terms for sin and describes it in many different ways. The following is a summary of the biblical usage and serves as an exposition of the post-fall reality.

 

 - John W. Mahony, “A Theology of Sin for Today,” in Fallen: 

A Theology of Sin, eds.  Christopher. W. Morgan & Robert A. Peterson, 2013.

 

Rhetorical Analysis of Paul's Letters

Why was rhetoric so important to a young evangelistic religious movement like Christianity? T. Engberg-Pedersen explains the matter perfectly: "Paul has also shown that precisely when the question is one of changing other people's lives the very content of the gospel demands a ‘method' of effecting such changes which is directly opposed to any use of force [or trickery].... It is that of speaking to them in ways that do not encroach upon their independence." One cannot command people to believe the gospel but must persuade them, and the art of persuasion in the Greco-Roman world was rhetoric.
 
Even after one has persuaded persons to believe, an apostolic figure like Paul knew that it continued to be better to persuade than to command one's converts, as in his words to his coworker Philemon in the midst of another impressive piece of deliberative rhetoric: "Therefore, although I could be bold and order you to do what you ought to do, yet I prefer to appeal to you on the basis of love.... I did not want to do anything without your consent, so that any favor you do would be voluntary" (Phlm. 8-9, 14). Paul knew perfectly well that proclaiming a monotheistic Jewish message in a polytheistic culture where anti-Semitism was rife required more than just words spoken in earnest and with passion. It required persuasion. The objections and the mental and emotional obstacles in the minds and hearts of the listeners had to be answered and removed if Jesus was to become their Lord and not merely another religious sideshow. And Paul knew that God had not left it simply up to the Holy Spirit to do all the heavy lifting of persuasion. Rather God commissioned proclaimers to do their part so that word and Spirit might work together to persuade and convert. The use of rhetoric was especially apropos and important in cities in the empire heavily influenced by Greco-Roman values, including by rhetoric - cities like Philippi, which had at the turn of the era become a Roman colony.
 
Deliberative rhetoric, had been the rhetoric of the Greek assembly (the ekklesia), the rhetoric of advice and consent, the rhetoric that helped people make decisions about the course they would take into the future. This sort of rhetoric, in the main, is what we find in Paul's persuasive missives as he seeks to shape the course charted by his charges into their future, including when he would no longer be around. As Quintilian stressed, letters that are meant to be proclaimed on arrival are in the main written-out speeches and were closer in both form and substance, in both style and content, to acts of persuasion than to ordinary mundane letters.
 
A bit more should be said at this juncture about the rhetorical device known as "exemplification." According to Quintilian, a named or anonymous person's character is set forth in part to excite or conciliate an audience's feelings and to spur them on to imitation. Using such examples was not merely an effective way to embellish one's oratory and bring it to the point of persuasion, but also a deliberate means of paraenesis, and used precisely that way by rhetoricians and moralists of Paul's era. The importance of this for analysis of Philippians should be obvious. Paul is using theologically charged arguments, including using a Christ hymn to urge the audience to have the same mindset as was found in Christ and in those who, like Paul, imitate Christ, and to walk worthily of the gospel and its principles.
 

--- Ben Witherington III, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, 2011.

Synagogue

The destruction of the temple during the Jewish exile led the Jews to emphasize the study and application of Old Testament law. This attitude contributed to the establishment of the synagogue as a pillar of Jewish practice. The exact time of the origin of the synagogue is uncertain, but many scholars have suggested that synagogues first appeared during exilic or postexilic gatherings of Jews to read and study the law. By the first century, synagogues were widely located throughout Palestine and the Diaspora. It was customary to form a synagogue whenever as many as ten Jewish men resided in a community.

The synagogue served as the center of religious, social, and educational life for the Jewish community. Jews gathered weekly for the study of the law and the worship of Jehovah. During the week children were instructed in the Jewish faith and learned to read and write. The synagogue also served as a center for receiving offerings for the poor and administering charity to the needy.

The synagogue was organized around a head or president (Mark 5:22), who likely was elected by vote from the body of elders. He presided over synagogue services and intervened in any disputes (Luke 13:14). The elders had general responsibilities for spiritual care of the congregation. An officer known as a hazzan cared for the building and its contents, blew the trumpet announcing the Sabbath day, and sometimes taught in the school at the synagogue. Perhaps the official of Luke 4:20 who received the scroll of Scripture from Jesus held this office. The use of the term rabbi as a reference to an ordained scholar belongs to the period after the destruction of the temple in a.d. 70. In the New Testament, the term was largely used to address Jesus or others as an authoritative teacher or master (Matt. 23:7; Mark 9:5; John 1:38; 3:2).

The synagogue building was normally a substantial stone structure, often elaborately furnished. Each synagogue had a chest containing the law scroll. The speaker’s platform was raised, and the congregation sat on stone benches around the walls or on mats or wooden chairs in the center of the room. To read from the scroll, the speaker stood. To preach, he sat down (Luke 4:16–20).

The synagogue service consisted of a recitation of the Jewish creed known as the Shema (see Deut. 6:4–5). This recitation was accompanied with praises to God known as the Shemone Esreh and was followed by a ritual prayer. The term Shemone Esreh suggests that there were eighteen benedictions of praise, but the actual number of benedictions varied by time and place. The reading of the Scriptures was followed by a sermon, explaining the portion that had been read. A blessing by a priest closed the service. In the absence of a priest, a prayer was substituted.

Jesus regularly attended and participated in synagogue services. Paul made synagogues his initial point of contact in the cities he visited (Acts 13:5). Some early Christian worship may have taken place in the synagogue, ...
 
Title: The New Testament: Its Background and Message, 2nd edition
Authors: David Alan Black, Thomas D. Lea
Publisher: B&H
  

The Simplicity of the Carefree Life

Anxiety is characteristic of the Gentiles, for they rely on their own strength and work instead of relying on God. They do not know that the Father knows that we have need of all these things, and so they try to do for themselves what they do not expect from God. But the disciples know that the rule is "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you." Anxiety for food and clothing is clearly not the same thing as anxiety for the kingdom of God, however much we should like to persuade ourselves that when we are working for our families and concerning ourselves with bread and houses we are thereby building the kingdom, as though the kingdom could be realized only through our worldly cares.

The kingdom of God and his righteousness are sharply distinguished from the gifts of the world which come our way. That kingdom is none other than the righteousness of Matt. 5 and 6, the righteousness of the cross and of following Christ beneath that cross. Fellowship with Jesus and obedience to his commandment come first, and all else follows. Worldly cares are not a part of our discipleship,  but distinct and subordinate concerns.

Before we start taking thought for our life, our food and clothing, our work and families, we must seek the righteousness of Christ. This is no more than an ultimate summing up of all that has been said before. Again we have here either a crushing burden, which holds out no hope for the poor and wretched, or else it is the quintessence of the gospel, which brings the promise of freedom and perfect joy. Jesus does not tell us what we ought to do but cannot; he tells us what God has given us and promises still to give. If Christ has been given us, if we are called to his discipleship we are given all things, literally all things. He will see to it that they are added unto us. If we follow Jesus and look only to his righteousness, we are in his hands and under the protection of him and his Father. And if we are in communion with the Father, nought can harm us. We shall always be assured that he can feed his children and will not suffer them to hunger. God will help us in the hour of need, and he knows our needs.
 

- Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, 1937.