Cause to Rejoice (05/04/24,05/06/24)

Sometimes I could wish I were far more versant in the intricacies of translation.  This is one of them.  Here at the end of verse 18, we have first to address a question as concerns this matter of rejoicing.  Is he appending to his notice that he does rejoice in seeing the gospel spread, or does this connect forward to what he is saying in these present verses?  Several translations appear to me to take the former tack.  The NASB, for instance, has “In this I rejoice, yes, and I will rejoice.”  It comes across as emphasizing the point made, before turning to his next thought.  Others, such as the ESV, indicate a cleaner break, choosing, as I have, to make this notice of future rejoicing the start of this new thought.  “I will rejoice, for I know…”  But this is only the first challenge faced in this wording.

Let me just lay out the Greek here.  En touto chairo.  ‘Alla kai charesomai.  Okay, so the KJV from whence the interlinear works sees end of sentence after the first note of rejoicing.  This, then, is followed by the assertion, Yes!  And I will…  But now I’ve got a challenge in front of me, for while this next note of rejoicing is clearly set in future, “I will,” it is also presented in the passive voice, and that does not appear to register in any of the translations I see.  This bothers me.  Yet, upon review of every lexicon at my disposal, I can discern not one notice of the passive voice here.  The future is well noted, but the passive seems to be of no consequence.  I do see that the language permits of a deponent passive term, but as I recall, that would require that there was no active voice counterpart.  Perhaps this is so in the future tense only?  I should think, if that were the case, that it might have been noted somewhere along the way.  They’re usually careful of that with middle voice terms.  But then, deponent middle voice verbs tend to have their own entry.

At any rate, we have two such Future Passive Indicative verbs in our passage.  There is this one at the start, and then there is Paul’s expectation that Christ will ‘be exalted’.  In that instance, it seems the passive nature of the thing is clear.  Christ receives the action of exaltation.  One could certainly argue that He is likewise the author of it, though Paul is the instrumental cause.  But come back to charesomai, and how does this play?  I will be rejoiced?  I will be well?  I mean, the term does, certainly in use as a greeting, admit of the sense, ‘be well’.  And I could see that lending a note of assurance to Paul’s discussion here, particularly with its connection to deliverance or salvation (yet another question as to intended meaning.)

Well, I’m not sure I have answers to offer at this stage, but I what I do have are a couple of interesting points drawn from lexicons I don’t generally frequent.  I’ll start with this, from the Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament.  “Joy is an expression of participation in the heavenly world.”  Now, there’s a note worth retaining!  These calls to rejoice that we find so often in Paul’s writings are not a matter of ‘leaping about like a young lamb’ to take an image from Zhodiates.  It might result in that, I suppose, but it’s not giddiness that’s in view, but rather, a being ‘calmly happy’, which is the measure Strong supplies.  But look at this!  You are granted participation in the heavenly world!

Pause on that.  There is one level of joy to be had here merely from the standpoint of being admitted into this heavenly world, and I suspect strongly that this is at least partially in view as Paul writes.  But I’ll get to that shortly, if not today.  But I am struck by this note of participation.  Perhaps it is only because that is an aspect of God’s dealings with us that I find particularly breathtaking.  I have mentioned it often, it seems to me.  God grants us the pleasure of being part of what He is doing.  We aren’t passive bystanders gawking at the wonders being performed around us.  We aren’t just on the sidelines as God undertakes to save this one and that.  No!  We have an active role in the action.  And know it well:  God doesn’t need us to achieve His purposes.  He is fully able to save each and every one of the elect solely by His own power exercised in His own person.  It didn’t have to be done this way, through the foolishness of preaching, and the willingness of His children to testify of His goodness.  But it is the way He has chosen, and in that choosing, He has granted us the joy of feeling useful, of being useful.

I recall reading about Onesimus, and looking up his name.  Strong gives the meaning of his name as ‘profitable’.  Elsewhere, I think I have seen it as useful, or advantageous.  And play that alongside the parable of the talents.  Do we not have this desire in us that come that day when we meet our Lord in the air, we have something in our record to demonstrate that we have been useful, that we have brought profit to our Lord and Master?  At the very least, is there not something deep inside that longs for life to have meaning, that rather insists it must have a point?  If the nihilists are right, and the atheists correct that we just live, die, and that’s it, then all our effort to be valued are pointless.  Who cares?  We live, we die, that’s it.  Game over.  What’s the point of trying, then?  And honestly, looking around, it comes clear that this is a huge part of the insanity gripping the world around us.  We have a generation brought up largely without God and without purpose, and they grasp at anything that looks like it might be purposeful, might give meaning to their empty lives.

What do you suppose has given the impetus to all these youth lending their moral support to a bunch of terrorists who would, given the least opportunity, subject these supporters to the very same terrors they have inflicted everywhere they go?  You’ve likely seen the same snippets I have, and observed that many of these protesters don’t even know what it is they’re protesting.  But it’s something.  It gives at least some small sense of doing something worthwhile, of giving some cause to be noticed and counted.  Of course, when that counting begins to threaten future plans, well, the song changes, doesn’t it?  But the underlying problem is untouched.  We have robbed a generation, probably more than one, of any sense of worth, any real purpose in living, and they are grasping at meaning, any meaning, even if they don’t know what it is they are grabbing onto.  There is no joy in it, because there is no cause for joy.  There is only anger, the excitement of the mob.

But come back to that beautiful definition we have been given.  “Joy is an expression of participation in the heavenly world.”  Allow me to posit that herein is the sole and exclusive basis for true joy.  And perhaps this morning, waking up in Florida, I have opportunity to make a distinction.  I awake to hear the same poor-will’s-widow calling outside that was calling as we went to bed last night.  There is an osprey nested in the tree, our nearest neighbor.  All else is quiet apart from the sound of insects churring, and it is quite peaceful, and indeed, delightful.  I know delight at the experience of these things, at the beauty of nature, even amidst the remnants of Ian’s destruction.  But joy?  Not of the sort that is in view here.  This is not the rejoicing of which Paul speaks.

That joy runs ever so much deeper, knows ever so much more significance in that which has caused joy to flow.  He’s already pointed us in the right direction.  The gospel is being proclaimed with boldness, with freely spoken testimony!  I rejoice!  And then he segues to the current thought, that he shall likewise have cause to testify of his Jesus, of this gospel; and that, before the rulers of the realm!  And already, he has seen the power of the gospel at work in the very household of the emperor.  What will God do?  What will He not?  These men who have turned the whole world upside down are now here in the heart of Rome.  God is in the heart of Rome.  And to be sure, Rome will never be the same.

That’s not to say there won’t be resistance and rejection.  But the gospel has come, and where the gospel has come, God’s work is done.  And so, turning to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, perhaps I can find cause to concur with their perspective on this particular notice of rejoicing.  They suggest that Paul’s point is that his is not just the preliminary joy of what has come about already but the realization of that future joy to come at the return of our Lord, experiencing that future, yet certain joy as one’s present experience.  There is a reason the world ought to experience us as joyful Christians.  We have hope!  It is not the tentative hope of the one who has desire for some outcome, but no real cause to suppose it may come to pass.  No!  This is the certain hope which gives rise to earnest expectation, to eagerly looking forward to what one knows is coming.  We don’t know when.  We don’t fully know how.  But we know God, we know our Lord, and we know that He has promised this:  He is coming back to bring us home.

And we know who He is, how He is.  We know with the depths of intimate familiarity that God is good.  We know it experientially.  We know it from the clear and constant experience of it throughout our life to this point.  We see it in those acts by which He preserved us even before we acknowledged Him, even when we were, in many cases, quite opposed to the very idea of Him having any say in our lives.  We know it ever more clearly day by day, as He over and again proves Himself good, loving, merciful, most thoroughly wonderful.  And we see again His power displayed in ways big and small.  I could turn back to the sounds of life waking up around me, and be held by the wonder of His creativity and His sustaining power.  I could contemplate the many whose faith is being stirred Sunday by Sunday, as God works in and through His church.  I could consider my own changed self.  Oh, the change is far from complete, and I can be cranky and rude at times.  But I am not who I was any more than I am as I shall be.  But I know that time will come, when His work in me is completed and I am, finally, as I ought to be.  Why?  Because God is who He is, and it has been and remains His good pleasure that it should be so.  And so, I rejoice.  And so, I shall rejoice, for I know with the fulness of knowledge that come that day – and it will assuredly come – I shall be whole, I shall have every cause to rejoice and be exceedingly glad.

And this is what bears us through our days in the present.  This is the full assurance in which we walk day by day.  Whatever this day may bring, whatever challenges and sorrows may accrue across my lifetime, in the end it shall be seen that they have come about for my good, for my deliverance, indeed, for my rescue.  Those are the moments that stand out.  Those are the signposts that we see looking back across life.  Look what He did there!  And to think, in that moment I was so very full of myself, so proud of how I navigated the trial.  It is only with the wisdom of hindsight that humility has come.  No, I was not that good.  I was never that good.  God, on the other hand, was with me even when I was yet His enemy.  Amazing!  And so, hope finds its anchor.  God loves me.  God has me.  What have I to fear?

Prayer and Provision (05/06/24-05/07/24)

I shall continue just a bit on this theme, though my focus shifts somewhat.  Reading of this future rejoicing, or being made glad, with its connection to what follows, we then hit another question.  What exactly is ‘this’ which Paul knows will turn out to his benefit?  We come first to the matter of knowing, “For I know.”  Young’s tries to emphasize the perfect tense nature of this knowledge, giving us, “for I have known,” but I think that pushes the idea too hard.  As noted elsewhere, oida is always in the perfect tense.  It effectively has no other tense, for in other tenses it would be eido, I see.  Granted, that can have the sense of, “I get it, I see what you mean.”  But this is simply stating data analyzed, conclusion reached.  I know.  Going over to the God’s Word Translation, we get this:  “Yes, I will continue to be happy for another reason.  I know that I will be set free…”  Well, I suppose that, were I assured of my release after so many years of imprisonment, I too, would be pretty happy.  But I don’t see that full assurance here.  Perhaps I should, but I don’t.  Seems to me that were he that fully assured of release, that note of ‘whether by life or by death’ would be somewhat unnatural to the context.  Maybe not.

But Wuest offers us a different understanding.  “For I know positively that this [the fact that Christ is being proclaimed] shall result in deliverance and preservation for me.”  That seems to me to come closer to the point.  It’s given its direction by that note of boldness which follows.  What is lost in translation is that boldness, here, has to do with speaking freely and fully, holding nothing back of the truth of the gospel.  And it this free, unrestrained proclamation of the gospel by which Paul expects to know Christ exalted in his body.  Indeed, though it’s a point for later, the sum of this is that his bodily wellbeing is less than secondary to the matter.  Come what may, Christ will be exalted by my actions.  There is a fearlessness in this, but it is a fearlessness born of looking beyond this life to the eternity ahead.  It is, as that definition offered, rejoicing in the future experience of joy in God’s kingdom here and now.

But I want to turn in another direction here.  Wherefore this deliverance?  The GWT observes, “I will be set free through your prayers and through the help that comes from the Spirit of Jesus Christ.”  Wuest prefers, “I stand secure in Christ through your prayers and His provision.”  Again, I kind of lean towards that latter understanding.  I stand through your prayers.  I think we should have to count the power and provision of the Spirit as primary here, for even where ‘your prayers’ contribute, it is by means of the power and provision of the Spirit.  But I find at least for myself that this understanding can tend to weaken my concern to pray.  If it’s all God’s doing anyway, well, He doesn’t need me praying in my room.  He’s got it covered, after all.  Yes, but God ordains that our prayers should be an integral part of His doings.  Why?  I don’t know.  Ask Him.  But it is clearly so.  The commands are too constant and too consistent.  “Pray without ceasing.”  That’s our standing order.  We can argue about what that looks like, about what constitutes prayer and what does not.  But the order remains the same:  Do this.  “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.”  Well, here’s a chief commandment.  Here is your response of love.  Pray.

What to do with this?  Does prayer shift God into action?  Do we somehow remind Him of things forgotten by Him?  Obviously not.  Has He somehow bound Himself such that He cannot undertake His purposes except we first pray that He might to so?  Hardly that.  But, if nothing else, prayer is of benefit to us as we pray.  It gives us opportunity to participate in His doings.  It gives us a part to play in His unfolding plans.  It grants us the occasion to feel useful, and that’s not a bad thing.

Can God work freely apart from our prayers?  Yes, of course.  Absolutely.  Will He?  If need be, I’m quite sure He will.  I mean, He managed to undertake the whole work of creation without us.  And He managed our salvation pretty well without us.  What stops Him doing as He pleases?  Absolutely nothing.  But still, He desires our prayers.  He desires our prayers even when they are ill-formed, selfish things.  But He desires even more that we should be praying prayers after His own heart.  “Thy will be done.  Thy kingdom come.”  That is the very heart of God-honoring prayer.

And yet, here is our apostle saying, “I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayers.”  Somehow, prayer matters, and it matters greatly.  God works through our prayers.  I don’t know as I can take the step farther to say that He works in response to our prayers.  I would incline to suggest that it is the case that God moves us to pray in accordance with His will.  Does this somehow empower Him to act?  I can’t see how that would be.  Since when is God in need of being granted permit to move, or given invitation to act?  Does He somehow need our prayers?  Again the answer is no.  God is not in need, period.  He has no dependencies and no lack in any regard.  But He desires that we would pray, and that we would pray in such fashion as suits His children.

What does that entail?  I think it encompasses our coming to Him as our Father.  It encompasses coming to Him with our questions and our doubts, that He might give to us from His wisdom.  I would even allow that it consists in making our wants and desires known to Him, because He does love us, and is generally pleased to bless us with such things, so long as they are not the lusts of sin.  But I expect He is far more pleased when we come to Him with true kingdom concern.  And it is evident that it is this manner of prayer that is in view with our friends in Philippi, or at least that is how Paul expects that God will shape their effect.  He is, after all, already seeing God at work in this situation.  He also has the benefit of having been told at the outset that he must bear this gospel to Rome.  Well, here he is, and the gospel is being preached.  Come his court date, and it will be preached to the heights of human power.  And I have no doubt but that his own prayers have been that God might be pleased to bring salvation even to such as the emperor.  It echoes, after all, his comment to Felix.  God is no respecter of persons, and therefore, neither is His servant.

And Paul clearly recognizes great value in prayer.  He is in constant prayer for the churches, even those he hasn’t visited.  And as he writes, he seeks their prayers on his own behalf.  Does that mean he never prays for himself?  I don’t believe so, no.  But it’s also hard to imagine when he’d find the time.  It’s more a question of priorities.  If he has prayer for himself, it seems to me that such prayers are concerned with his faithfulness to pursue the course God has set him with all diligence and care.  His prayer for others, for that matter, is much the same.  It’s kingdom focused, and that’s my point.  Prayer has power, in particular, when it is concerned more with God’s purposes and less with our comfort.

This mindset does not preclude prayers for our comfort, I suppose, but I should think it sets them in last place, more a footnote, an, oh, if you don’t mind afterthought.  When our prayer life is all about give me, give me, give me, I can’t help but think that our perspective is askew.  Perhaps it’s just my upbringing, but I don’t think so.  As with any gift of the Spirit, this privilege of prayer is given in order that we might apply it to the edification of our brothers, and to the furtherance of the gospel.  It’s not an ATM card.  It’s a duty.  It’s a duty we do in loving gladness, for it is opportunity to visit with our Father, to share ourselves with Him, and to hear from Him.  But while He is indeed our Father, and most loving, He is also our Master, our Creator, awesome in power, and absolute in authority.  So, in all things, we do well to consider what we pray.  Does this mean we should first pray that God will instruct us what to pray?  I don’t know.  That feels a bit too clever to me, prideful after its own fashion.  But I would expect that as we mature our prayer life matures, and that we naturally (or supernaturally, if you prefer) incline towards praying more as we ought.  And we also pray in the trustful certainty that we have the Holy Spirit indwelling, and if it should turn out we speak awry, He will edit and filter the result so as to present an honorable and pure request before the throne.

It is interesting, isn’t it, that Paul sets the prayers of his friends even before the provision of the Spirit in his thinking here?  This will turn out well through your prayers and the provision of the Spirit.  Clearly, prayer has power.  To be honest, I struggle with that concept.  Again, God is not moved into action because I prayed.  Yet, when prayer honors Him, He is honored to oblige, though never obliged to oblige.  I have known those who suppose that appending, “nevertheless, Thy will be done,” is somehow an evidence of weak faith, or of unbelief.  Yeah, I know I’m supposed to pray like this, but I don’t really believe it’s going to happen.  Well, perhaps that is the case.  I can think of occasions where I’ve been called upon to pray for some specific thing that I frankly could not say with any sort of certainty was in fact God’s intent.  So, you know what?  I’m not going to pretend a certainty I don’t have.  I know God can, and I can certainly accept that He might.  But I can hardly count Him obligated to answer as I have asked.  Far better He should answer as He desires.  Far better.  He is wise beyond limit.  I am shortsighted and easily led astray.  Whose will would you prefer?

But if the Spirit indeed prays for us with incomprehensible utterances when we know not how to pray as we ought, then it ought to lend us a greater liberty in praying.  It’s not necessarily that He grabs our tongue, bypasses our language circuits, and causes some gibberish encoding.  He doesn’t need to sneak a message through enemy defenses undeciphered.  There may very well be times when He feels it necessary to do something like this, but I suspect it has more to do with preventing us blaspheming than with bearing deeper thoughts aloft to heaven.  If, on the other hand, He is monitoring, adjusting, improving our phrasing or altering our request so as to retain original intent yet align it more fully with God’s purposes?  Then indeed I have an Attorney at my side, an Advocate in heaven, seeing to my best interests.  And thank God for that!

Prayer matters.  It has power.  But its power is not in our speech.  Its power is in the provision of the Holy Spirit.  I would not be surprised if this were Paul’s intended understanding here.  Your prayers are part of the provision of the Spirit.  They are the means He has chosen to utilize, or one of the means.  Because I know you are praying for me and that God honors prayer, not bound by it, but answering it in accordance with His purposes, I know that this will turn out for my good.

Now, whether Paul intends salvation or deliverance, you be the judge.  If it is salvation, it is not salvation unto life.  He’s already fully possessed of that, and I’m pretty sure he knows it.  But deliverance from this present imprisonment?  Salvation from the intent of those who had first caused him to be imprisoned?  Yes, here is a place he could stand to see God working.  Here is a place where the prayers of the saints would be welcome.  But I think the welcome has less to do with being delivered from this prison cell (though that would indeed increase his opportunities for preaching).  Rather, as we see in what follows, his concern is to speak boldly, to preach fully and fearlessly, even in defending himself before the tribunal.  Life or death as the outcome is frankly of minimal concern to him.  And this very attitude, we might well attribute to the bolstering prayers of his friends.

There is a place, I think, that we know a need for backup.  When it is time to declare the gospel, when it is time to make a defense of God’s truth, I don’t doubt but that even the best equipped of teachers feels the need for spiritual backup.  After all, however eloquently one may speak, however knowledgeably he may expound on the wonders of the Scriptures and of God, it remains mere words until and unless the Spirit chooses to inhabit those words, to soften the hearts of those listening, and to grant faith and faith’s response in them.

Would it be so in this trial?  Might it be that God would opt to use his defense as the seed of faith in those hearing his case?  It might be the emperor.  It might be some other of those hearing his case.  It might be some random observer in the galleries, assuming such were permitted.  But God would do what He would do.  It is enough for His servant, that he has done his part faithfully.  And it is easier to rest in knowing one has done so when one knows he has the backing of the saints, by their prayers, bolstering his own courage and intent.

Prayer has power, and because of that, Paul has certain expectation.  He expects deliverance, though that may or may not mean liberating from his imprisonment.  Live or die, he remains delivered.  Live or die, he has had, and will have experience of God’s power to deliver.  It keeps coming back to this mindset of, come what may.

Lord, I should have to say that in general, I remain far removed from such a mindset.  Would that it were in me to believe in this fashion, to have faith so strong as to face even loss of life with full confidence that my life, even in death, remains in Your hands.  I mean, I know this is the case.  I know it to my bones.  Yet, it does not always produce in me the steadfast boldness that it should.  I would have to say it rarely does so.  I have great confidence in You, great confidence in the final outcome.  Yet, I know myself hesitant to speak, guarded in my words.  I can justify it to myself, but I can’t make it seem right, not when I look at examples such as this.  I can only pray that You would fashion from this faulty clay the man that You desire me to be, and that I may indeed be faithful to You to the end, come what may.

Confidence (05/08/24)

Paul’s knowing has foundation in past experience.  It also has impact on future expectation, and that is what he sets out before us in verse 20.  Such is his assurance that he sets it forth in multiple terms.  We have as the first, earnest expectation, which translates a single, compound word in the Greek.  A literal translation would give the sense of expecting from the head.  With a bit of thought, it’s easy to see the intended image.  We were at the beach yesterday, and could see pelicans flying over the waves. Once having seen one take a dive after fish, I found I looked expectantly for a repeat performance as they flew over.  It’s such a sight to see, and not something I was going to see back home.  I don’t know as this captures the eagerness, but the expectant looking, the anticipation of seeing a dive, watching for it, tuned in.  That at least begins to capture the idea, I think.

For fans of any given movie, I should think the same might apply to particularly well-remembered scenes.  There is an eager anticipation of the scene, a ‘wait for it’ mindset, perhaps more intensely so when viewing the movie with somebody who’s not seen it yet.  It adds to the anticipation, in that now not only do you await the scene itself, but also the response of this new viewer.  Will they feel the power of it?  Will they be as amazed as you were?  Well, shouldn’t that same anticipation apply as we consider presenting Jesus to someone who has not as yet come to know Him?  Shouldn’t that same eagerness apply in waiting to witness what it is God will do on this occasion?  Now, you might think maybe Paul would have become kind of used to such evangelism, that it might have lost some of that excitement for him.  After all, it had been his life these last twenty years and more.  But I expect it’s the kind of thing that never grows old, never grows ordinary.

And even if such familiarity had arisen as to the general course of ministry, or as much as being housebound these last several years might have taken the shine off the work, what lay before him was bound to stir the emotions.  He was to stand before the emperor himself and present this gospel.  Now, we have seen enough of Paul to recognize that he was hardly one to be cowed by such an event.  He had already presented to the likes of Felix, and Festus, and from Acts we can gain a sense of his demeanor on those occasions.  He was respectful, but he was earnest.  He acknowledged their authority, honored their office, but as concerned the gospel, he made known to them their need, which is to say their equal standing before God.  Would that you were as I am, apart from these chains (Ac 26:29).  What a bold response!  Yet, careful.  No hint of rebellion here, no grumbling prison talk.  Just the earnest looking for a response to this glorious gospel of Christ, some hint of the Spirit working upon these men.

And I think it reasonable to suppose that this was Paul’s mindset then, as it was now.  After all, look at the impact he has been having even from his prison cell.  Even those in the guard are getting it, at least at some level.  At minimum, they are seeing that he is no threat to the Roman peace.  But they are also being seeded with the gospel, and should God so choose, those seeds would take root and flourish.  And it’s clear that in some cases this was transpiring, for we have that greeting at letter’s end, conveying the fellowship of, “those of Caesar’s household” (Php 4:22).  Well, how had they come to faith?  Were they believers before Paul came, visiting him in his imprisonment to make known their presence?  Or were they reached by these same guards who heard Paul’s preaching in this house, whether by choice or by necessity?  Indeed, given that the Praetorian guard had the duty of guarding that household, perhaps that is the intended reference, that even those guards guarding the emperor himself believed.  But I tend to think this is more to the idea of staff, perhaps of kin.

Whatever the case, Paul is eagerly looking forward to the chance, finally, to stand before this tribunal and show them Christ.  This is, after all, why he is here.  It’s not for subverting law, whether Mosaic or Roman.  It’s not for stirring up trouble, though trouble has assuredly been stirred up wherever he went.  Of course, as the record shows, this was done by those Jews from Asia.  Indeed, had those from Jerusalem come up to make their case (assuming they were invited to do so), it’s clear that Paul knew very well how to stir their agitation.  And he, by comparison, remained calm, cool, and rational; perhaps the influence of growing up in the metropolitan atmosphere of Tarsus.  It would be evident enough which were the troublemakers, and which the voice of reason.

But at this stage, I am guessing Paul had little expectation of any such contingent arriving.  It would simply be Paul declaring the gospel to these who would hear his case.  And knowing his gospel and his God, knowing that he had the churches praying for him, knowing that he was here quite fundamentally because God had purposed that he should be, he had very positive expectations as to the impact he would have.  Again, from all that is in this letter, especially this first chapter, it’s pretty clear where Paul’s expectations lay.  It wasn’t about release from prison, though I’m sure the desire for such release was strong.  Well, I suppose you could say it was about that release, though not necessarily in the sense that we might expect.  Dead or alive, he would be released.  That was settled.  And dead or alive, he would be heaven-bound.  That, too, was settled.

It’s funny.  Just yesterday, I was reading comments from some relatively local voice on the web, observing how this confidence in salvation which one finds at least in certain branches of Protestantism was rather off-putting.  It seems so arrogant, so presumptuous.  And, at least by this one’s lights, even those Protestant forebears, the Puritans, would have found it so.  Perhaps.  But what little I have read of their writings doesn’t lead me to conclude that this is the case.  It’s one thing to be confident of one’s final outcome.  It’s quite another to presume that this assurance means everything done prior to that is either perfect or perfectly pointless.  For my part, I could say that I eagerly look for that day, expecting from the head that indeed I shall meet my Savior and be welcomed into eternal fellowship with Him.  But I am under no delusions of perfection in the present.  Far from it!  I dare say I probably have a lower opinion of myself in matters of faith and the disciplines of grace than do most who know me.  But it’s not on the basis of my disciplinary progress, nor on the basis of my confident belief that I anticipate this welcome.  It’s on the basis of the love of my Savior.  It’s on the clear experience of His call.  And it is bolstered by what is, from my perspective, the clear message of Scripture.  “I have called you by name.  You are Mine” (Isa 43:1).  Were ever more wonderful words received?

And so, perhaps, I can move to this second note of expectancy in Paul’s declaration.  This earnest expectation is joined with hope.  And here, as so often, we must distinguish between common English usage and Greek significance.  This isn’t wishful thinking.  This isn’t the hope of maybe it’ll turn out okay.  You know, I head out on this vacation, and I hope it will be enjoyable.  I don’t account it guaranteed.  Must seek release from this tendency for grumbling.  Lord, may it be so.  This is so utterly unbecoming in Your child.  Help me to be rid of it.  Help me to pay heed to this failing and undertake to change.

But back to Paul.  He has hope.  Here in this prison cell, he has hope.  It’s not the hope that maybe, just maybe, Nero will be sane that day and acknowledge his innocence.  It’s the assurance that whatever Nero may decide, God has already decided.  Salvation is his, whether it is found in release from prison, or in martyrdom.  Makes no difference.  As he says in the next verse, “To live is Christ and to die is gain” (Php 1:21).  That aspect is at least relatively insignificant.  Indeed, as he gives expression to his thinking, he’s not even sure at this stage which is the better answer for him, only that whichever is the better answer, that is the one God will provide.  You can sense him working through the equation, concluding that, given the need of the church that yet remained, he would likely yet remain to minister to that need.  So be it.  But should God have this day appointed for his completion of assignment, then, too, so be it.

That’s not where his confidence is pointed.  That’s not what his anticipation has in view.  What is in view for him is the opportunity presented for the gospel.  “I will not be put to shame in anything.”  He’s not concerned for personal reputation.  He’s concerned with representing Christ well.  His reputation is nothing.  Christ’s glory is everything.  And so, he seeks prayer and power to speak boldly, for that is the boldness in view here.  It’s not some working up to a prison break.  It’s the boldness to speak honestly, holding nothing back, giving no thought to personal gain or loss in what is said; just speaking the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.  And beloved, God is Truth.

So, here we are.  Paul has eager, expectant confidence that come what may, he will honor God by his actions and by his words.  He does not fear the trial ahead, but rather is excited for the opportunity.  Here is a ministry opening that goes beyond all one could have hoped for!  Here is the chance to proclaim the gospel before Nero himself, that he, too, might hear and know that there is One God, One Lord, One Savior, in Jesus Christ, God’s own Son, who died for our sins that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.  Glory to His name!  And may we, in our turn, in our day and age, come to have this same eager confidence, seeking and availing ourselves of every opportunity to make our glorious Savior known to a world most clearly in need of knowing Him and knowing Him truly.

Freedom of Speech (05/09/24)

Perhaps, then, we can proceed to the next thought, although I’ve already begun to discuss it.  I’ll turn to the Good News Translation, which writes, “My deep desire and hope is that I shall never fail in my duty.”  The duty in view is that of speaking freely, frankly, as Zhodiates suggests, freely saying all one thinks.  How different this is from the guarded care we take in speaking to others.  At church, we have, perhaps, a reputation to uphold.  At work, there must be a certain degree of concern as to what our freely expressing ourselves may cost in terms of promotions, or even continued employment.  Certainly, every whistleblower must feel this concern.  And yet, something moves them to boldly speak the truth.  It lacks, perhaps, that ‘in love’ aspect which is so central to the Christian perspective, or at least is supposed to be.

But you have to admire the perspective Paul offers here, and even desire that you might come to that same place in your own faith.  I fully expect and hope that I will not put myself to shame in anything.  Now, remain clear on this.  This is not concern for personal reputation.  It’s concern for true representation.  He does not seek his own honor but his Lord’s.  Christ will be exalted.  That’s the expected impact of his boldness.  All concern for personal outcome is thrown aside.  Whether I live, whether I die, let Christ be honored by all I say and do.  And shouldn’t that be our own earnest desire and hope?  Yet, such hope is difficult to obtain when we have doubts as to our willingness to stand firm, to speak boldly.  And even where we may find boldness to speak our minds, there is the ever-present issue of anger and the need to be recognized as right.  I choose my words carefully here.  It’s not the need to actually be right that has our focus, but the need to be thought right, our version of things accepted and agreed upon.

But that’s not at all what Paul sets before us.  No.  He has a duty to speak, to speak truly, to present the gospel in all the love of God.  It is when we can be moved to such actions that God is exalted.  It is then that we in our own turn fulfill our duty, fulfill the purpose for which we were created and then recreated.

Thinking along these lines, I have to confess that I was rather entertained by the way the Message opts to translate this, writing, “They didn’t shut me up; they gave me a pulpit!”  Now, that is eye-catching, and brings a sense of satisfied amusement at the irony of the thing.  Oh, those pesky Jews from Asia.  They thought they really had him this time but look what God did!  Ha hah.  But in fairness, I don’t think there’s any of that feeling of retributive justice in Paul’s response.  I’m not sure he’s even giving those who brought about this situation a second thought.  To the degree that they enter his thoughts at all, I suspect it’s more along the lines of, hey, it got me here.  So, yes, they gave him a pulpit, but I don’t think this entered his mind.  Rather, God had arranged this pulpit, and he would see to it that having the pulpit, he presented the gospel, fully and truly.

So, let me bring this around to our own day, our own involvement in the ongoing work of the kingdom of God.  You can’t help but notice that there is something here for us.  The goal is that Christ be exalted, and we see by Paul’s example that Christ is best exalted when we speak freely and truly of Him.  And I suppose we should have to take a step beyond this point and say that He is most honored when we speak freely and truly of Him to those who as yet don’t know Him, which is to say in an evangelistic setting.  And that, I must confess, becomes quite uncomfortable for me.  I don’t feel that tug for evangelism, and in fact, would just as soon let folks get on with their lives.  I mean, sure, if they are feeling that tug of the Lord and come looking for answers, that’s one thing, but to push this all unbidden?  Nah.  Not my style, really.  For one, I recall quite well how I used to respond to such pushy sales tactics.  I don’t like it for roofing.  I don’t like it for Christ.  And I often wonder how long my coming to faith was delayed by such encounters.  Of course, all things transpire on God’s schedule, and as such, transpire precisely when they should, so far as He’s concerned, and as such, I have no complaint.  He has made me who I am in accordance with His plan and purpose.  And in that same light, I am tolerably comfortable with my lack of interest in evangelism.  Not my gift.  Mine is more a gift for discipleship, or so I have come to believe.

But there is a point at which my inherently introverted nature becomes an impediment.  I shy away from speaking, would as soon keep my thoughts to myself, however godly they may or may not be.  There is an exception when I am reasonably confident that those listening are inclined to hear with acceptance.  But if it seems likely to produce debate and defensiveness?  Pass, thanks.  And this mindset does not well comport with that boldness of which Paul is so confident.  As such, I have to wonder what’s wrong with me.  As I wrote in preparatory notes, if my trust in Christ is real, why this hesitancy to speak of Him?  Wherefore the closet Christian?  Well, assuredly, there is significant pressure from the world around us to act in this fashion, and if that’s the cause, it needs to be rejected.  But in all things, even this, it is the will of my Lord I must seek and then seek to obey.

Father, in the name of my beloved Savior, I would ask Your aid with this.  There is this tension within me, for I know myself well, but I so often lose sight of You.  Where boldness is needed, I pray an abundant provision of Your Spirit that I may be bold.  And I must add, I pray that with that boldness, You would supply a double portion of grace, for I have seen myself in action, and know too well how readily anger and frustration can undermine whatever good I thought to do.  It seems this is as true in matters of discipleship as in things evangelical.  And it also seems to be coming more into the foreground these recent days.  It’s as though something in me is hardening, not in resolute devotion, but in defensiveness, and this is most unhealthy.  You know it.  I know it.  What I don’t know is how to deal with it, how to bring peace.  Well, I do know, and I am doing that.  I am coming to You, my Prince of Peace.  And I ask with no little trepidation that You might so act upon my person as to make me a man of peace even amidst the perceived trials.  If there is a need for firmness and standing fast, then teach me how to present that attitude in love.  If there is a need for correction, let me learn to apply it in love.  And please, Lord, if the problem is me (and I strongly suspect it is), fix me.  I am a broken man, but I am Your servant and Your child.  Help me.  Amen.

Living for Christ (05/09/24-05/10/24)

We come at last to that come what may attitude.  By life or by death, let my whole being exalt the Lord.  And there is, in that note of deliverance, a sense certainly that Paul expects this trial to result in his release.  We’ll see it stated more clearly before long in this letter.  He expects to be released because he senses the need for his ministry has not disappeared.  They still need him up in Philippi.  And this is not some overinflated self-worth on his part.  It’s an honest assessment of the facts presented him.

But this leads to a question, doesn’t it?  If he’s so confident of living through this ordeal, why even give any notice to the possibility of death?  I mean, it would appear he has already passed beyond any such concern, if ever he had it.  I have little doubt that at some stage in these last few years, Paul has pondered the possibility, perhaps even gone through periods where it seemed the more likely outcome.  We must recall that Paul is indeed a Roman citizen, and by all evidence, appeared to have confidence in Rome’s sense of justice, even when the system of justice malfunctioned in regard to his own case.  You see it repeatedly, how he appeals to Roman law to address these things.  Further, the full depravity of Nero had yet to manifest.  Claudius had indeed caused trouble for the Jews, and it seems likely that this was still having some impact on his friends up in Philippi.  Recall that the Jews there were not even permitted to have a synagogue within the city.  And the complaints most often raised against him before the authorities was that Paul was promoting a belief system not legal for Romans to pursue.  That again speaks to the misunderstanding that Christianity was just a subset of Judaism.  And that, I might note, is still a misunderstanding commonly found among Christians, that somehow the church and the synagogue are one.  I would have to say that there may come a time when this is true, and the remnants of Judaism come to recognize their Messiah, but that time is clearly not yet, not the present order of the synagogue.  And I would further have to say that Jesus made that abundantly clear with his prophecy, a prophecy fulfilled in Trajan’s destruction of Jerusalem.

But I digress.  Why this talk of death when Paul is confident of life?  I come to the conclusion that his point here is to reduce the significance of the body.  This is not dualism.  This is not the heresy of accounting the body as nothing, and the spirit as all.  But it is a recognition that the issues of this present life fade to insignificance in comparison to the eternal weight of glory.  We live what, 60 years?  Perhaps so much as 100?  It’s nothing.  Even taking the perspective of young earth believers, it’s nothing.  Set it in the scope of more commonly accepted timelines (and I do not comment on their correctness), and really, the whole of human history is little more than a blip on the chart.  And yet, we place so much weight on our daily actions.  We care so greatly for our comforts, our health, our prospering in this life.  And Paul forces us to a new perception:  Whether I live or die, let Christ be exalted in me.

This is not some one-off prison cell perspective.  It’s not hopelessness seeking to stir up some hidden ember of hope within by positive talk.  No.  We have it from him in so many places.  We have died already, died to sin.  We have entered into life that is so eternal that even the grave does not bring it to an end, only brings it into rest, awaiting the day of being fully renewed, body refit for eternity as our souls have already been refit.  This, after all, is the hope of the resurrection.  It’s not a hope of entering into some ghostly afterlife where we drift all unnoticed through the realms of the living.  No!  There comes a new body, like but not alike to that which we have known.  It isn’t subject to wear and tear as this body is.  It doesn’t respond to sinful lusts as this body does.  It doesn’t age and fail.  It is fit for eternity, as we are being made fit for eternity.  And that’s the thing that holds Paul’s attention.  Christ lives in me!  And because He lives, I shall live.

Hear your Lord on this!  “I AM the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, and everyone who believes in Me will never die.” (Jn 11:25-26).  And of course you must hear this with the question that followed:  “Do you believe this?”  If you do, then death has no hold on you, death holds no fear for you, for you belong to Him who conquered death.  There is a basis for confidence in this life.  There is the basis for Paul’s confidence in his imprisonment.  Whatever Nero might decide could impact no more than the span of his human life.  And I have little doubt but that Paul also acknowledged that even this impact did not really belong to Nero.  For God knows the number of our days, having ordained the same.  If then, this was Paul’s time to enter into God’s rest, then it would be so, however it came about.  And if it was not, then whatever Nero’s intentions, he would go on.  It’s God’s intentions, after all, that count.

This is the message.  And again, I must emphasize that despite any seeming resemblance, it is not the message of the Manicheans or any like heresy.  But rather, it is a focal point of concern for the man of God.  What matters is not what shall happen to me, what shall become of this body of flesh.  After all, however long I may live, and even should I live to see the day of my Lord’s return, yet this body, being perishable, must perish.  From dust it came, to dust it returns.  This is the invariable truth for every man, beliefs to the contrary notwithstanding.  What matters, then, is not what is done to us, but what we have done with this gift of life.  For Paul’s immediate context, that means that what matters is how he speaks when the time comes to make his defense.  He hopes to speak, which is to say, he expects to speak with absolute frankness as to the God in Whom he has believed, the God he serves.  He shall, as ever, preach only Christ, and Him crucified.  It had been a hard message to deliver to Jews.  It had been a difficult message to declare to the Greeks.  To the one group, it was too scandalous to be accepted, to the other, too foolish to be believed (1Co 1:23).  Now it was to be emperors and senators, or men at arms.  The message would not change.  Paul’s resolve to proclaim Christ in full would not change.  Whatever, then, was done to his body as a result, it would be to the glory of God.  This is Paul, bondservant of Christ.  He belongs to Christ.  It is for Christ alone to say what shall become of him.  And trusting Christ, he can trust that whatever that may be, it would indeed prove to be for his deliverance, his good.

Hear, after all, what he had written to the church in this city of Rome some years ago.  “If we live, it is for the Lord.  If we die, we die for the Lord.  Either way, we are the Lord’s” (Ro 14:8).  It happens that I reread that chapter this morning as part of my reading in Table Talk.  The context is a discussion of differing practices.  Some took to avoiding meat lest they eat what was offered to idols.  Others ate unconcerned.  Some viewed particular dates as significant, others not so much.  It still seems to me that much of this was aimed at division between Jews and Gentiles in the church.  But the application is wider, isn’t it?  The point is captured in that verse just quoted.  We are the Lord’s.  It is He who speaks to our conscience, and it really doesn’t matter much the methods He uses with this one or that.  Nor does it matter that you, in the depths of your conscience, are convinced of one thing, while I am convinced of an entirely opposite thing.  Now, obviously, this does not apply to all things, nor even to most matters of doctrine.  But what he has in view are not matters of doctrine.  They are matters of discipline, perhaps, or maybe response to prior traditions, either held or rejected.  They do not bear upon one’s salvation, or the validity of their faith.

Do you see, from that chapter, what matters far more?  How are you dealing with these differences?  Do you capitulate to what’s more accepted rather than heeding the voice of conscience?  Wrong answer.  Do you seek to force or cajole adherence to your views in another despite their conscience leading them otherwise?  Wrong answer.  Do you ridicule those who think differently than you?  Wrong answer.  Do you insist on your right to do as you see fit, even knowing that it causes doubts in your brother?  Wrong answer.  We belong to the Lord, and we must indeed pursue His will.  We ought rightly to pursue His will exclusively.  But that does not mean that we pursue our rights belligerently.  That does not mean that we are granted license to trample the conscience of another because we are more enlightened, at least so far as our opinion of self is concerned.  Indeed, if that is our driving principle then it is quite evident that we are not particularly enlightened at all, and might even find cause to question our salvation.  Too strong?  Well, how are you His if you set your agenda before the express instruction to edify your brother?  That doesn’t mean you beat him over the head with his errors.  That doesn’t mean you humiliate him for his lack of understanding.  That does not edify.  That, more than likely, just builds resistance in your brother, and resentment, closing the door to any possibility you ever had to speak into their life.  Happy now?

This is exactly what Paul is exemplifying here.  They preach to annoy me?  Sorry.  They’re preaching, and their preaching is accurate enough.  Christ is proclaimed.  I have no complaint if the message didn’t come by me.  It’s not about me.  I am here because those back home couldn’t accept the inclusion of the Jews?  So be it.  It has positioned me for my assignment, and God shall be praised, by me, by those who learn of events here.  Think about it.  Even today, as we read of Paul’s exploits for the faith, what comes of it?  We find more than sufficient cause to give God the glory.  We may make more of Paul than he would be comfortable with, were he with us here, but even in that, we glorify God, for never was there a man so clearly God’s man.

Will the same be said of us?  I think of R.C. Sproul, who’s had such an influence on my own development, though I never met the man, rarely heard his preaching or teaching directly, other than in those first few years when his broadcast intersected my commute.  But his influence was profound, both through his own teaching, and through those who taught as part of his ministry.  I think much of him, even still.  And I have to say, it’s a rare man of God whose reputation survives his body.  So many heroes of the church have been revealed as less than godly in retrospect, or at least besmirched with such reputation when they could no longer defend themselves.

At any rate, this is the grand question for us, we who remain alive to continue the work of the kingdom.  Put in like predicament, how would we respond?  Would we, like Paul, dismiss the consequences and steel ourselves to preach the Gospel fully and clearly?  Would we make concessions to the ways of those we would reach, seeking to accommodate the message, make it more palatable?  Would we – perish the thought! – deny our faith to save our skin?  Far be it from us!  Yet, I have to confess that to the degree I contemplate such an event, I tremble to think how I would respond.  Perhaps it is this self-recognition which has led others before me to contemplate martyrdom as an honor.  After all, God will not tempt us beyond our ability.  If He has seen fit to arrange a martyr’s end for us, then it is an evidence of His estimation of our character and ability.  And to be sure, His estimation is correct.  It must be, for He is all-knowing.  He knows our inmost thoughts and fears, even when we aren’t terribly clear about them ourselves.

So, such a direct consideration of being on trial for Christ may be too much for us, and I get that.  I share that.  But take the second-tier question.  Set yourself as the recipient of this letter, which, of course, you are.  But try and see it as these first readers would have done.  Your founder, your father in the faith is in a Roman prison, due to face Caesar, and he has just told you that he intends to hold nothing back, but present the Gospel in full, declare Christ in full.  This must surely include presentation of Christ as Lord, not as a Lord, but as the Lord.  It includes informing Caesar that he is not, after all, supreme, nor even deity (which was an assumption, or at least a pretention at the time).  It was a loyalty test of sorts to declare Caesar as lord, and thus, it was a particularly dangerous stance for the believer to insist that no, Christ is Lord, and Him only.  It was not meant as any offense to civil authority, but truth must out.  Fealty to Christ requires fealty to truth, for God is Truth.

With that in mind, sit down in Philippi and read this letter.  You know firsthand what influence Caesar has on local goings on.  Claudius took offense at the Jews and next thing you know, you can’t have a synagogue in the city, and Romans consider it practically a capital offense to even consider Judaic practices.  What, then, if Nero hears Paul’s defense and rejects it?  This could indeed have serious implications for them, even in relatively faraway Philippi.  After all, Paul’s guards would know of his communications.  I mean, Epaphroditus had just been there, still was as this letter was written.  And we know that Paul did most of his writing via dictation, so they would have heard all that was said.  Those greeted at the end would be known to the guards, at least as names.  Their monetary support of Paul and his ministry would be known.  And Epaphroditus they would know on sight, having been in the room with him these past months.  It could very well turn out to be the case that Paul’s boldness would come at cost not only to his body, but to theirs as well.

Do you suppose they may have had such thoughts as they heard this expression of boldness?  I mean, they had been praying for it, so maybe they had long since counted the cost and decided it was worth it.  Or maybe it hadn’t occurred to them.  Maybe their faith was so strong that even when the thought did come, their only concern was to be as steadfast as their father.  It certainly seems to have turned out that way in the fulness of time.  When persecutions became much more serious, it is the likes of these believers in Philippi who were found even rejoicing to be dragged off to the Colosseum to face their bodily death.

So, what about us?  Will we be cowed in fear, lest the world think poorly of us, or will we resolve to boldly stand with God, boldly proclaim His message to this world so badly in need of hearing it?  And if we have doubts about the answer, what shall we do?  For my part, I shall pray.

Lord, I don’t like the answers I hear in my own head as I consider these things.  I find it disconcerting, the degree to which I would just as soon keep my faith to myself, or perhaps among those I already know share like faith.  I am weak.  That much is certain.  And of late, my example has been repeatedly ungodly.  It is disconcerting, at the very least.  Where is the man of God that You have been making me to be?  Am I still so full of myself?  What is to be done?  Why do I find it so off-putting to witness my wife in her overflow of spirituality?  What is wrong with me, Father, and how do we fix it?  I need You.  That is clear.  I love You, and yet, I am still too much in love with this present life.  I don’t ask for detachment and disregard, but I do ask that You would help my perspective.  Help my weak resolve, my lack of confidence in You, and, as must be the case, do something about this overweening confidence in myself.  I’m clearly underserving of it.  I am not yet who You want me to be, but I want to be.  May it be so in Your power and in Your time.