Principles of living a set apart, godly life [18] – Jews, Christians and Divine Law

 I have pointed out that YHVH withdrew Himself from His chosen ethnic group, the Jews, such that with the Assyrian and Babylonian Conquests, Israel’s infrastructure, its monarchy, along with its delegated rulers, priestly arrangement, temple and so on were lost. Although exiled Jews returned to their land decades later and the temple was eventually rebuilt, their full infrastructure was never fully reinstated. In due course their promised Messiah was revealed, but despite their advantages in being prepared for their Messiah, Jews rejected Jesus as a charlatan or impostor. 

Speaking to Jews about the Law, Jesus declared, ‘Don’t consider that I come down to loosen or dissolve the law or the prophets, I am not coming to loosen or dissolve, but to fully complete. 18 Because I say to you, ‘So be it up until the heaven and land come alongside. No, not one iota or accent goes away from alongside the law up until all comes into being’, (Matthew 5 v 18, 19). Jesus confirmed what he meant by ‘law’ when he then went on to talk about judicial approval and the depth and scope of behaviours such as murder, adultery and taking oaths.  

Yet in his letter to Christians in Rome, Paul says, ‘But now we are being rendered entirely idle away from the Law, dying and withering away within that holding us down, in order that we serve within new, fresh breath [pneuma] and absolutely not within obsolete writing’, (Romans 7 v 6). He says something similar in his second letter to the Corinthians. ‘Now if the ministry of death, having been engraved in letters on stones and which is rendered idle and inactive….’ (II Corinthians 3 v 7, 8a). Paul always urges Christians who have been persuaded of the Messiah to the point of obedience to live a godly life day-by-day. Yet nowhere does he say to Christians, ‘Therefore walk around within the sphere of the Law and keep its injunctions’. If learning about and trying to obey the injunctions of divine Law was the effective means to live a godly life, then surely this is exactly what the Apostle would have said – but he never does. Instead, he urges Christians to exercise enlightened self-control and walk around within the sphere of the Breath. So how do we reconcile these seemingly contradictory perspectives about the Law? Does every small detail remain, or is it fading away?

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [17] – Jews and Divine Law

 The written codes of divine Law were given to the Jews through Moses at Sinai and form an essential part of the Sinai Covenant that YHVH made with the Israelites, a Covenant that they accepted to be placed under. These written codes present an integrated set of spiritual/moral injunctions. They are not simply a set of moral codes, nor are they a set of prescribed independent religious ceremonies. The morality or ethics that these codes present arise from spiritual considerations and realities. Thus Jews quite rightly saw the collection of laws as an integrated whole. It is not possible to separate these injunctions into two distinct and separate sets of injunctions. But this is what many Christians do – they divide these injunctions into ‘ceremonial’ laws, and ‘moral’ laws. 

I propose that this is a false dichotomy. Rather, what was established was a Levitical priestly order and for Jews, divine Law defined both moral and spiritual boundaries. These injunctions prescribed what was to be done about transgressions of these boundaries. The prescriptions were sometimes like ‘civil law’, involving compensation payments or substitute payments to the offended individual, and they were related to the severity of the transgression. Transgressions were also atoned for in ceremonies performed by the priests, and these usually involved sacrifices of birds and animals. Sometimes compensation payments and sacrifices were prescribed. There were also regular sacrifices of animals and birds to which Jews contributed. These provided a more general atonement for self-forfeiture. Such sacrifices were based on the concept of life-blood and life-breath. Thus I am proposing that divine Law provided an integrated, holistic system of injunctions, prescriptions and priestly sacrifices. 

As the book of Ezekiel outlines in overview, Jews and their leaders were often wayward and negligent with regard to the Covenant and to divine Law. The priesthood and Israel’s leadership were often corrupt, and the people engaged in idolatry. Eventually YHVH stopped being patient with them and His honour and praiseworthiness departed. The infrastructure of - its monarchy, temple, priestly order and sacrifices was rendered ineffective by the Assyrian and Babylonian Conquests. YHVH withdrew Himself to leave Jews to their own mistaken, empty thinking and desires. Even after Jewish captives were allowed to return to their land decades later, the previous orderly system was never fully restored. Jews lived in ‘occupied territory’ and were governed as a province of various Gentile empires. Eventually, in 70 AD, the rebuilt temple was destroyed and Jews were thrown out of their historical homeland. God’s withdrawal away from Jews continues down to this present day, but as well as presenting God’s judgements in advance, the Hebrew Prophets also present the promise of future restoration, prosperity, security and godliness for Jews. 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [16] – Divine Law defined

 What is divine Law? In Scripture the word ‘Law’ has a number of meanings, the particular meaning intended often being determined by the context in which the word ‘law’ is found. ‘Law’ can refer to the first five books of the Old Testament – the Pentateuch. Or it may refer to the larger body of the Hebrew Scriptures that includes the writings of the Prophets. It may refer to the written codes given to the Israelites through Moses as part of the Sinai Covenant after YHVH had released the Israelites from slavery in Egypt. Or it may refer to a fundamental principle that leads to specific patterns or types of speech and behaviour. It is the last two meanings that we will be concerned with more often than not. 

YHVH made a Covenant with Abraham and his male descendants, declaring that they were to be His chosen people and that He would be their God. Abraham and his male descendants were to be circumcised as a sign of this Covenant. Failure to be circumcised meant that such an individual would be cut off from his people, (Genesis 17 v 10 – 14). Prior to the exodus of Abraham’s descendants from Egypt under Moses, there were no sets of written codes away from God. 

On delivering Abraham’s descendants, the Israelites from slavery in Egypt, YHVH set out how things were going to be for as His chosen ethnic group. They agreed to be placed under what is sometimes called the Sinai Covenant, as part of which various written divine Laws were established, including the Ten Commandments. The Israelites were expected to live their lives in obedience to these Laws, which were intended to act like a ‘schoolmaster’ to keep them in God’s favour until the appearance of their promised anointed deliverer, the Messiah. These written Laws were seen as fixed and immovable – some of them literally being written in stone. The earlier instruction to be circumcised was re-stated in the written codes in the book of Leviticus, (Leviticus 12 v 3).     

Thus it was to Jews, not to Gentiles - other ethnic groups - that the written codes of divine Law were given. Other ethnic groups were left to their own ways of thinking, reasoning and behaving. And of course many such groups became worshippers of idols and so on. After the coming of the Messiah, Paul declared, ‘ …we are men of like affections to you, announcing the gospel to you, to turn away from these worthless vanities towards the living God who constructed the sky, the land, the sea and all within them, Who in ages gone permitted all the tribes and races to travel their own ways’, (Acts 14 v 15, 16). And again, ‘…we ought not to hold to the principle of God being like gold, silver or a skilful stone sculpture and the deliberation of a human being. Indeed therefore, God overlooking times of ignorance now commands all human beings everywhere to think and perceive afterwards’, (Acts 17 v 29, 30). 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [15] – Knowledge of error

 What I have been saying in the previous posts leads us to another basic question – ‘How do we know that we have displeased God or fallen into error?’ Initially the heralding or announcing of the word of the cross – the gospel – presents people with the concept that they are out of favour with God and are in need of a Saviour in the light of coming judgement. As the gospel is presented, people are urged to hear, perceive and think afterwards about what has been said, to reason it through to its conclusion. If they are persuaded, they are urged to turn back to God and show evidence of their change of mind by carrying it across into their speech and behaviour. Their change of speech and behaviour is the fruit of their perceiving, thinking and changing their mind afterwards. 

Having been persuaded with regard to the Messiah to the point of entrusting obedience, professing their faith and being baptised, Christians are urged to live a godly life that is set apart from the values, principles and behaviours within the worldly order, to live a clean, pure life that honours God and His anointed Messiah. So the question, in part, is this – ‘How do Christians know what God prefers and approves of?’ 

In answering this question, many Christian leaders point to divine Law – Sinai Covenant Law - in the Old Testament or Hebrew Scriptures. For example, if a Christian is stealing in one way or another, such leaders or fellow Christians immediately point to the Ten Commandments in order to persuade such a Christian of their wrongdoing and guilt, using the Law as a ‘prod’ to stop their fellow Christian from stealing again. Thus we have this scenario: Is a Christian stealing? Then quote Deuteronomy 5 v 19 as God’s authoritative word and command – ‘You will not steal’ – so as to convict them of their error and guilt and spur them on to change their behaviour and live a godly, clean life. That’s what the Apostles did, right? Er, no, the Apostles did not do that actually. The Apostles did not constantly quote divine Law when faced with Christians falling into error. In Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians in which he addresses their many failures and errors, not once did Paul point them to the Ten Commandments or to Levitical Law. 

So what do we see? Continuing the example of stealing, in Ephesians we read, ‘The one stealing and thieving, let him steal no more, but rather let him work hard virtuously and beneficially with his own hands, in order that he hold to share with those having need’, (Ephesians 4 v 28).  In Titus we read, ‘Slaves to be subordinate to their masters, being pleasing and acceptable within everything, not contradicting, not misappropriating, pilfering or stealing, but indicating all good fidelity in order that they put into order the teaching of God our Deliverer within everything. Because the free gift of God bringing salvation is manifest to all men, to train us, in order that, contradicting ungodliness and worldly desires, we live within the present age devoutly, moderately and judicially approved, awaiting the enviable confident expectation, namely the manifestation of God’s honour and praiseworthiness and our Saviour, Jesus the Messiah’, (Titus 2 v 9 - 13). If the process or method of Christians living a godly life meant exposing wayward Christian behaviour by quoting divine Law, then such a procedure would certainly have been evident in these verses. 

Yet many Christians insist on using divine Law to goad their fellow Christians into living a godly, clean life. This is a major theme within the theme of living the Christian life and I am now going to spend a series of posts exploring this important subject.   

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [14] – Repentance [12 of 12]

 Last of all there is the Greek word ‘metamelomai’, which is related to ‘metanoeó’ and ‘metánoia’. It is a verb meaning ‘to change one’s care or concern afterwards’ and it usually implies an element of regret or remorse. It occurs six times in the New Testament. Despite this subtle change of meaning we are still looking at the ‘inner realm’ of an individual, at the energy and impetus within their ‘psyche’, their speech or behaviour being the ‘fruit’ of this energy of care and concern within. 

This word is first found in Matthew’s gospel, in one of the parables. ‘There was a man who had two sons. He went to the first one and said, ‘Son, go and work today in the vineyard.’ 29 Answering, he said, ‘I will not’. But later, changing his concern afterwards, he went.  30 Then to the second he said the same thing. Answering, he said, ‘I sir?’ and he did not go. 31 Which of the two did the will of his father?” “The first,” they said. Jesus said to them, “Honestly, I tell you that the tax collectors and harlots are preceding you into the kingdom of God. 32 Because John came towards you within a judicially approved way and you did not entrust him, but the tax collectors and harlots entrusted him. But you, seeing this clearly, did not change your concern afterwards and entrust him’, (Matthew 21 v 28 – 32). Jesus presented his teaching in parables to those Jews who were not particularly ‘religious’ and who as such did not attend synagogues. The theme is their wayward behaviour and lack of entrustment in their promised Messiah. 

There is a self-explanatory use of the word ‘metamelomai’ with regard to Judas Iscariot. ‘Then Judas, seeing his [Jesus] handing over alongside because he was judged worthy of punishment and changing his concern afterwards, turned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders’, (Matthew 27 v 3). 

Paul uses the word in relation to his concern over the Corinthian Christians grieving over his admonishments in his earlier letter. ‘Because even if I have grieved you within the letter I do not change my concern afterwards, even if I did change my concern afterwards because I indeed saw, because that letter yonder, if even towards a time, grieved you’, (II Corinthians 7 v 8). In effect Paul is saying that he was concerned that he was causing them grief, but this did not mean that he changed his initial concern over their wayward behaviour.

 

Finally we see an example with regard to the faithfulness of God and the Messiah. ‘But together with an oath through it being said to him, [Jesus], ‘The Lord swears a promise with an oath and absolutely will not change His concern afterwards. You [are] a priest penetrating towards the age’, (Hebrews 7 v 21). Jesus is God’s anointed Messiah, His chosen Deliverer made head of a royal priesthood like the order of Melchizedek, and this is based on God’s promise, sworn on an oath, and as such, God is absolutely not going to change His concern or care.

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [13] – Repentance [11 of 12]

 Inevitably there are some who seem to embrace the Christian faith but then, for one reason or another, they fall away and perhaps if they are disillusioned enough, they even begin and continue to ridicule and scorn the Messiah that they once seemed to embrace. Whilst they persist in this wayward scornful attitude, the writer of the letter to the Hebrews has this to say. ‘Therefore, sending away the beginning teaching on the basis of maturity…. we will do this if God permits, because the once-enlightened, tasting of the heavenly gift, becoming sharers of the set-apart Breath 5 and tasting the virtue of God’s utterance and also intended age power, 6 falling alongside, are unable to restore themselves again penetrating into a change of mind and perception afterwards, crucifying again the Son of God and putting him to open shame’, (Hebrews 6 v 1, 3 – 6). Verses 4 - 6 are difficult verses to translate precisely and I have presented them as best as I can. The reference seems to be to those who have made a profession of faith in the past, but who have then turned away and are now treating the gospel with scorn, openly and actively ridiculing the Messiah. Whilst they remain in such an attitude of mind they are crucifying the Son of God all over again. Such an obstinate and active opposition of mind renders them unable to change their minds after further thought or after a re-presentation of the gospel. They are simply too opposed to the Messiah and the gospel to be persuaded. 

Esau is presented as another example of someone who was unable to show evidence of thinking again. He had sold his birthright – his right to an inheritance – and when he realised what he had missed out on, he tried to show that he had changed his mind. The author of the letter to the Hebrews says this about him. ‘Because you know that even afterwards, wishing to inherit the honour and praise, his change of mind and perception afterwards was rejected after examination, because he found no place even though he sought after it with tears’, (Hebrews 12 v 17). Esau pleaded with tears in his eyes that he had changed his mind about selling his birthright and that he wanted to turn back and reverse his decision. But on closer examination his plea was rejected because it was determined that he simply wanted the honour and praise that he had forfeited by his actions.

Finally we have this statement with regard to the unexpectedly long period of time that seemed to be occurring without the Lord returning. Many Christians, including the Apostle Paul, considered that the return of the Lord was imminent. Yet as time went on it appeared to be delayed. But Peter declared, ‘The Lord is absolutely not delaying the promise in the way that some think of delay, but is patient toward you, not intending any to perish but on the contrary, all to enter and hold penetration into a change of mind and perception afterwards’, (II Peter 3 v 9). Despite Paul’s belief that Jesus was returning very soon, he qualifies this by saying elsewhere that the Lord will not return until the full number of Gentiles are brought in, (Romans 11 v 25). And John says that he will not return until the full number of martyrs have come in, (Revelation 6 v 11).

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [12] – Repentance [10 of 12]

 Christian leaders did not merely keep repeating the basic message of the gospel. Like the writer of the letter to the Hebrews, they urged Christians toward growth and maturity, and to more advanced teaching. ‘Therefore, letting go from the beginning word of the Messiah on the basis of maturity, not carrying once more the laying of a foundation of a change of mind and perception afterwards away from dead actions and entrustment on the basis of God to the point of obedience….’, (Hebrews 6 v 1). Once an individual changed their mind and moved towards persuasion within the Messiah, the foundations about baptism and obedient godly behaviour were taught such that teaching and instruction could then build on these foundations to enable the Christian to move towards further establishment. The focus moved towards more advanced teaching and towards Christians living a godly life day-by-day. 

Needless to say, some Christians fell into error, exercising speech and behaviour that God disapproves of. If such errors were serious enough, such as bringing the gospel into disrepute, such Christians incurred admonishment from the Apostles and overseers.  

When Christians were admonished and corrected by the Apostle Paul because of their wayward behaviour, some of them experienced grief and sadness. Paul responded by saying, ‘I am not joyful that you were grieved and pained, but that you grieved penetrating into a change of mind and perception afterwards; because you were grieved down from God in order that you suffer loss within nothing from out of us. 10 Because down from God, grief works down to penetrate into a change of mind and perception afterwards without regret, but grief of the orderly arrangement works down death’, (II Corinthians 7 v 9, 10). For various reasons, despite embracing the good news of the Messiah, the Christian life is not all smiles and glib happiness. For example, a Christian’s wayward speech and behaviour can lead them to grief and sadness. In these verses Paul explains the difference between grief down from God that leads to a change of mind; and the grief within the world that leads to insensitivity and unresponsiveness to God. 

 

And of course, Christians encounter enticements and opposition of one kind or another when they declare their faith in the Messiah. When attempts are made by Christians to restore their brothers and sisters who are in error, such wayward Christians may react with opposition and they may resent such interventions. How are concerned Christians instructed to respond to such resentment and opposition? ‘But, bond-servant of the Lord, it is not necessary to quarrel but to be gentle toward all, able to teach, patiently forbearing, correcting those setting themselves in opposition within gentleness in case at some time God offers a change of mind and perception afterwards penetrating into knowledge of truth’, (II Timothy 2 v 24, 25). Paul says that such opposition or resentment does not present well-meaning Christians with a justification to engage in quarrels and arguments. The Greek philosophers on Mars Hill had invited Paul to speak about the gospel, but when they heard about the resurrection some of them reacted with scornful ridicule. Paul did not then engage in passionate arguments and disputes with them, he did not engage in ‘apologetics’ in order to try and justify the gospel to them. Instead he exercised spiritual discernment and walked away, not willing to throw pearls in front of swine. 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [11] – Repentance [9 of 12]

 With regard to the ill-treatment that Jesus received we read this. ‘It has been written in this manner: The Messiah experiences ill treatment and rouses from out of lifelessness the third day to herald a change of thinking and perception afterwards and the sending away of no share and self-forfeiture on the basis of his name towards all ethnic groups, beginning away from Jerusalem’, (Luke 24 v 46, 47). In previous posts we have seen that although this good news concerning Jesus and the sending away of no share is presented to all ethnic groups, the initial focus of the New Testament in the gospels and the early chapters of Acts is on God’s chosen ethnic group, the Jews. This good news was initially presented to Jews, because as God’s chosen ethnic group they had many advantages that prepared them for the Messiah, such as the Law and the Prophets. But because of their persistent disobedience, since the Babylonian Captivity Jews have been left to their own empty thinking as God had withdrawn Himself from them. As a result, the Jews rejected Jesus, seeing him as a false Messiah. Thus the message to Jews was that ‘The God of our fathers rouses Jesus, whom you lay violent hands upon to hang upon a tree. The right hand of God lifts him up and exalts him as chief leader and deliverer, to give Israel a change of thinking and perception afterwards and a sending away of no share and self-forfeiture’, (Acts 5 v 30, 31). Again we read, ‘Of this, away from the seed [of David], God, down from a promise, brings Israel Jesus the Deliverer, John heralding beforehand, in front of his coming, an immersion of a change of thinking and perception afterwards to all the people of Israel’, (Acts 13 v 23, 24). But many Jews rejected Jesus and presumed that they were within God’s favour simply because they were descended from Abraham. They refused to acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah, leading Paul to ask, ‘do you despise and scorn the wealth of His useful kindness, patience and tolerance, unaware that God’s useful kindness leads you towards a change of mind and perception afterwards?’, (Romans 2 v 4). 

In due course, other ethnic groups, referred to in Scripture as ‘Greeks’ or ‘Gentiles’, were seen to respond to the gospel and this was reported to the council of Jewish Christians in Jerusalem. ‘Hearing these things they were tranquil and honoured God saying, ‘Therefore God gives a change of thinking and perception afterwards towards life even to other ethnic groups’, (Acts 11 v 18). Paul testified to the Ephesians saying among other things that he 'shrunk back under nothing that they carried together, except declaring to you and publicly teaching you also from house to house, giving solemn evidence, God penetrating a change of thinking and perception afterwards towards both Jewish and Greeks, and entrustment within our Lord Jesus’, (Acts 20 v 20, 21). And again, ‘…but first to those within Damascus and then all Jerusalem and the region of Judea, and to the Gentiles, I announced to think and perceive afterwards and return on the basis of God, accomplishing actions worthy of a change of mind and perception afterwards’, (Acts 26 v 20)

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [10] – Repentance [8 of 12]

 ‘Metánoia’ is the noun that corresponds to the verb ‘metanoeó’ that I mentioned in the previous post. ‘Metánoia’ refers to someone who has ‘a change of thought and perception afterwards’ – an ‘after-thought’. It occurs twenty-two times in the New Testament and it presents the same themes as the verb ‘metanoeó’.

In Matthew’s gospel, when John the Baptist rebuked the Pharisees and Sadducees who came to him for baptism, he criticised their presumptions. ‘Therefore construct fruit suitable to a change of thought and perception afterwards, and so do not think to say within yourselves, ‘We possess Father Abraham’, (Matthew 3 v 8, 9a). See also Luke 3 v 8. We see here the differentiation between the thought itself and the behaviour that follows. John describes the behaviour as the ‘fruit’ or produce of thought. Thought that exists within us is thoroughly carried across to the other side and manifest in our observable actions or behaviour. 

John the Baptist says, ‘Indeed, I immerse you within water penetrating towards a change of thought and perception…’ (Matthew 3 v 11). The ‘thinking and perceiving afterwards’ is the ‘seed’ of the ‘fruit’ of behaviour. Thus, ‘John came to be within the wilderness immersing and heralding immersion, a change of thought and perception afterwards penetrating towards a sending away of no share and self-forfeiture’, (Mark 1 v 4). See also Luke 3 v 3. Paul also testifies to this process, ‘Then Paul said, ‘John baptised an immersion into a change of thinking and perception afterwards, telling the people penetrating towards the coming after him in order that they entrust, they exist, within Jesus’, (Acts 19 v 4). The ‘thought afterwards’ penetrates into a change of behaviour and entrustment in the Messiah to the point of obedience.

This thinking and perceiving after hearing the gospel is necessary because of our natural ignorance and the mistaken patterns of thought that arise from the energies within our fleshly constitution. These fleshly patterns of thought lead towards insensitivity and unresponsiveness to God, and leads some to conclude that God approves of them. But Jesus said, ‘I have not come to summon judicially approved by God, on the contrary, those falling short and widely missing the mark, penetrating towards a change of thought and perception afterwards’, (Luke 5 v 32). 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [9] – Repentance [7 of 12]

 Despite being God’s chosen ethnic group, Jews remained resistant to the gospel. They remained without persuasion with regard to their Messiah. But the exhortation to think and perceive afterwards did not remain restricted to Jews. Following the ‘Great Commission’ given to the Apostles in Matthew 28 v 19, the good news of the Messiah was heralded not only to Jews but also to other, non-Jewish ethnic groups as well, referred to in the New Testament as ‘Greeks’ or ‘Gentiles’. We see this development emerge in the narrative in Acts of the Apostles. As with Jews, Gentiles are urged to repent – to think and perceive afterwards.

On one occasion Paul was invited to speak to Gentile philosophers who loved to debate on Mars Hill. Introducing the gospel Paul said, ‘Indeed therefore, overlooking the times of ignorance, God at this present time instructs beside all people everywhere to think and perceive afterwards because He stands a day within which He intends to judicially separate out the inhabited within justice’, (Acts 17 v 30, 31b). After the death and standing up again of Jesus, the good news was extended beyond Jews. Thus God exhorts non-Jews to think and perceive after hearing the good news – to reason things through to their conclusion. This was Paul’s usual approach – declare the gospel and exhort hearers to think, reason things through and perceive afterwards. ‘…first to those within Damascus and then all Jerusalem and the region of Judea, and to the Gentiles, I announced to think and perceive afterwards and return on the basis of God, accomplishing actions worthy of a change of mind [metanoia]’, (Acts 26 v 20). In this verse we see a clear distinction between thinking and behaviour. The order is this – 

        Hear the announcement of the gospel

        Think and reason it through to a conclusion afterwards

        Perceive the reality, the truth

Then -

        Apply this enlightened knowledge 

        Exercise mastery over your body 

        Turn around or return to God and

        Accomplish behaviour, construct fruit, worthy of this change of mind

Many, but not all of these kinds of references to repentance look at Jewish and Gentile responses to the heralding of the gospel. 

Less often a verse addresses a Jew or a Christian who has fallen into error and behaving in a way that misses the mark when seeking to live a godly life. Then the procedure is this – 

After falling into error 

        Think and perceive the reality, the truth of your error 

Then -

        Apply enlightened knowledge

        Exercise mastery over your body

        Turn around or return to God and

        Accomplish behaviour, construct fruit, worthy of this change of mind

Thus Paul says, ‘…lest when I come again my God humble me towards you and I grieve much over those sinning previously but absolutely not having thought and perceived afterwards on the basis of the impurity, the harlotry that they are accomplishing’, (II Corinthians 12 v 21). Similarly in the book of Revelation we have this verse that I propose is a prophecy written mainly to Jews. ‘Therefore recollect from what place you have fallen and think and perceive afterwards, and construct the most important actions. But if not, I come to you and will remove your lampstand from out of its place if you do not think and perceive afterwards’, (Revelation 2 v 5). Similarly there is this, ‘…some of you hold to the teaching of Balaam…. In the same way, some of you also hold to the teaching of the Nicolaitans. 16 Therefore, think and perceive afterwards! But if not, I come to you quickly and will contend with them within the sword of my mouth’, (Revelation 2 v 14 - 16).  

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [8] – Repentance [6 of 12]

 Moving away from the gospels, the initial emphasis in the book of Acts still centres on Jews as God’s chosen ethnic group, with calls being made to them to repent – to think and perceive afterwards. At Pentecost the disciples were filled with the set-apart Breath and began to speak in tongues, and Peter addressed the gathered crowd of Jews to explain what was happening. He told them, ‘Think and perceive afterwards and be baptised within the name of Jesus the Messiah, every one of you. Towards the letting go and sending away of your no share and self-forfeiture, and you will receive the free gift of the set apart Breath’ [Pneuma], (Acts 2 v 38). There is the basic dynamic of the gospel when it comes to those who are not persuaded. 

Peter says a similar thing later on in Solomon’s colonnade in the Temple. After explaining to Jews about Jesus and using examples from Jewish history and references to their Scriptures, he says, ‘Therefore, think and perceive afterwards and return towards the whole smearing out of your no share and self-forfeitures’ (Acts 3 v 19). So the initial emphasis in the early chapters of Acts is still on Jews as God’s chosen ethnic group, with a call that after hearing the gospel they think, reason things through and perceive.

Similarly, if a Jew exhibited behaviour that God disapproves of, they were exhorted to think and perceive afterwards. Thus when Simon tried to buy the ability to practice divine favours from the Apostles, Peter rebuked him. ‘Therefore think and perceive afterwards, away from this wickedness of yours, and earnestly request the Lord whether indeed you will be forgiven the purpose and intent of your deep inner core’, (Acts 8 v 22). The exhortation to him is to re-appraise his behaviour and intentions in the light of future judgement.

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [7] – Repentance [5 of 12]

 In the gospels, when it comes to ‘repentance’, the focus on is on Jews as God’s chosen ethnic group, and their thinking and perceiving after they have heard the good news proclaimed. ‘Repentance’ is, by enlarge, centred on unfaithful, wayward Jews re-assessing their behaviour and lifestyle in relation to God. Ultimately it is a call for Jews to turn away from worldly attitudes and behaviours and to re-appraise the values and principles that they are living by, because their promised Messiah and the kingdom is coming near.    

In chapter 17 of Luke’s gospel, the focus shifts to Jews who have been wronged or treated unfairly by a fellow Jew. How was a Jew to react if a fellow member of God’s chosen ethnic group was missing the mark or behaving unjustly toward him? Was the Jew who was being treated unfairly to start lecturing the offender about Covenant Law? Was he to regard the offender with a superior sense of contempt from a position of self-righteousness? Was he to hold a grudge even if the offender apologised and sought to make restitution? 

Jesus said, ‘Pay attention to yourselves. If your brother misses the mark and errs, admonish him, and if he thinks and perceives afterwards, send him forth and forgive him. If he misses the mark toward you seven times in a day and seven times turns toward you saying, ‘I am thinking and perceiving afterwards’, you will send him forth and forgive him’, (Luke 17 v 3, 4). Yes, by all means, point out their error if you are being wronged. But if the brother who is in error considers his speech and behaviour afterwards and accepts his error, then the onus is on you to send the error away. You are to forget about the error and forgive him. How many times should you forgive such a person? Seven times a day if necessary.    

This is surely what we hope for from God as Christians. We fall into error and come to God in prayer, acknowledge our error and seek to turn away from it, requesting that God forgive us. But we find that there are some errors that are persistent. We fall into such an error again and once again we sincerely repeat our request for forgiveness. Then we fall into the same error yet again. In such cases we are grateful for God’s forbearance, patience and mercy in the light of our weakness. Jesus expects both Jews and Christians to imitate this love with regard to each other – to show practical, beneficial love to one another. This is his primary instruction.

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [6] – Repentance [4 of 12]

 Jesus was critical of those who presumed that they were judicially approved in front of God. We can still hear this kind of sentiment today - ‘I have not been a bad person really – I have not murdered anyone or anything like that. I am sure that a loving God will understand and say that I tried my best, and that He will forgive my mistakes and welcome me into heaven’. 

But this is what Jesus actually says on this matter. After presenting the parable of the shepherd who rejoiced on finding his lost sheep, Jesus said, ‘I say to you that in the same way there will be joy within heaven on the basis of one sinner thinking and perceiving afterwards, than on the basis of ninety-nine upright and righteous, whosoever, absolutely not requiring to possess thinking and perceiving afterwards’, (Luke 15 v 7).  In other words such people, whoever they are, need to think again. Jesus presents a similar conclusion after his description of a woman who lost a coin, searched for it, and rejoiced at finding it. Jesus concluded by saying, ‘I say to you, in this way there is joy in front of the angel/messengers of God on the basis of one sinner thinking and perceiving afterwards’, (Luke 15 v 10). Once again this is a message to Jews. There is rejoicing in the heavenly realm when angels observe the beginning of a positive response to God when a Jew who has lost their way thinks afterwards and turns back to God. 

So what is it that people need to be presented with in order to be persuaded to the point of obedience? Do they need fine orators and clever, witty speeches? Do they need a preacher with personality and charisma? Do they need a slick outreach campaign with professional musicians and an attractive, entertaining presentation with all the razzmatazz? Do they need clever, educated proposals and arguments? In Luke’s gospel there is the illustration of a rich man who dies and finds himself unable to escape torment within the unseen realm. Some distance away he sees Abraham in a state of comfort, but there is a deep chasm that separates Abraham from the rich man such that the rich man cannot cross over to Abraham. So the rich man calls out and pleads to Abraham for someone to appear to his five brothers, to give them solemn evidence of the place of torment, so that they might avoid it. But Abraham replies, ‘“They possess Moses and the Prophets, they should hear and comprehend them.” 30 But the rich man said, “By no means father Abraham…’, in other words, there is no way that my brothers will listen to Moses and the Prophets. So the rich man makes an alternative proposal, ‘….but if one away from death travelled to them they will think and perceive afterwards.” 31 But Abraham said to him, “If they are not listening to Moses and Prophets they will not be persuaded, not even if one from out of death stands up”’, (Luke 16 v 29 – 31). The Apostle Paul presents this same principle in chapter 2 of his first letter to the Corinthians. The declaration of the gospel, the word of the cross, even when it is presented in a stumbling, hesitant way that lacks eloquence, is a sufficient means for the Breath of God to bring forth enlightened persuasion and thinking afterwards within those whom God has selected. 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [5] – Repentance [3 of 12]

 The call to repent meant that hearers were to think and perceive after hearing the gospel, or a call to godliness, or after they had seen the power of God, such as in a miracle. They were to use their intellect and their minds concerning what had been said and/or what they had seen, in order to come to a conclusion. But different people came to different conclusions.

Thus, observing sad events sometimes led people to draw the wrong conclusions. Jesus refers to two such events in Luke 13 and makes some comments to the Jews who observed them. Pilate had mixed the blood of Galileans with their sacrifices, and Jesus said, ‘Are you supposing that these Galilean sinners came alongside all the Galileans because they experienced this ill treatment? 3 I say to you by no means, not at all. But on the contrary, if lest you are thinking and perceiving afterwards, you will fully lose in the same way. 4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell, killing them. Are you supposing that these debtors came alongside the people dwelling in Jerusalem? 5 3 I say to you by no means, not at all. But on the contrary, if lest you are thinking and perceiving afterwards, you will fully lose in the same way’, (Luke 13 v 3 – 5). 

The Greek phraseology is slightly complex but what Jesus seems to be saying is this - ‘Do you think that those who have died in this way are now being honoured and rewarded by God? Do you think because they have died in this way that they have now joined an illustrious company of the divinely approved? On the contrary, unless you think again you also will lose everything in the same way - suddenly and completely’. 

Many Jews boasted of their advantages and privileges because they were members of God’s chosen ethnic group. They were descended from their patriarch, Abraham, to whom God gave many promises, and they possessed the prophets and divine Law for example. Some of them presumed that because they were born Jews they were therefore destined for divine favour and a divine inheritance regardless of their behaviour. Not so, says Jesus. Unless you think again after seeing such sad events you also will suddenly and unexpectedly lose everything. 

Jesus was speaking to non-religious Jews who nevertheless presumed that they were in a state of divine favour. We sometimes see the same attitude today in some unbelievers who presume that in the end, if an all-loving God exists, He will forgive them and welcome them into paradise – after all, they live in a ‘Christian country’ and they are ‘trying their best’. When faced with a tragic event involving the unexpected death of a friend or relative, many people often comfort themselves with similar presumptions. ‘They are up there now in peace, looking down on us until we meet again’. But Jesus says, ‘On the contrary, unless you think differently afterwards, you also will suddenly and unexpectedly lose in the same way’.

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [4] – Repentance [2 of 12]

 In the New Testament, the word ‘metanoeó’, often translated into English as ‘repent’, means ‘to think and perceive afterwards’. Its first occurrence is in Matthew chapter 3. ‘In those days John the Baptist came near, proclaiming and heralding in the wilderness of Judea 2 saying, ‘Think and perceive afterwards, because the Kingdom of the heavens is coming near’, (Matthew 3 v 1, 2). This call to ‘think afterwards because the kingdom of the heavens in coming near’ seems to be the essence of John’s message as well as the conclusion of his proclamation. As a result of his message his hearers were to think and perceive after what has been said, to use their intellect and their minds with what had been said in order to come to a conclusion. As with the Apostle Paul in I Corinthians, so also with John the Baptist – John addresses the minds of his hearers. 

Later on Jesus began to herald the same message. ‘Away from that time Jesus began proclaiming, saying, ‘Think and perceive afterwards, because the Kingdom of the heavens is coming near’, (Matthew 4 v 17). Mark’s gospel records it this way, ‘After the surrendering up of John, Jesus came into Galilee proclaiming and heralding the good news of God 15 saying, “The season is made full and the Kingdom of God is coming near. Think and perceive afterwards and be persuaded within the good news to the point of obedience’ (Mark 1 v 14, 15). Like John and the Apostle Paul, Jesus addressed the minds of his hearers. Having heard his proclamation they are to think and reason afterwards with they have heard, so as to bring it to a conclusion.

Indeed, Jesus rebuked those who did not use their mind and reason abilities in this way after they had witnessed his power - presumably his miracles. ‘At that time he [Jesus] began reproaching the towns within which most of his power and ability came to happen, because they did not think and perceive afterwards. 21 ‘Alas, you, Chorazin! Alas, you, Bethsaida! Because if the powers and abilities happening within you took place in Tyre and Sidon they would possibly have thought and perceived afterwards long ago, within sackcloth and ashes’, (Matthew 11 v 20, 21). See also: Luke 10 v 13. Teaching and proclamation was no mere abstract theoretical exercise. Jesus, John the Baptist and the Apostles were not presenting a lesson in abstract, academic theological theory. In thinking things through afterwards these hearers were meant to thoroughly carry their conclusions from within across into their practical behaviour. Jesus said that as a result of thinking and perceiving afterwards, those in Tyre and Sidon would probably be in ‘sackcloth and ashes’ – indicating mourning and regret for their wayward behaviour - as they returned to God. Effective hearers don’t just come to an abstract theoretical, doctrinal or theological conclusion – their thinking is carried over into their speech and behaviour. But the initial emphasis, the seed of this change of behaviour, is the mind - thinking and reasoning afterwards with something that has been said or witnessed.

We can see the emphasis on the mind time and time again in the New Testament. ‘The people of Nineveh will stand up with this generation within the judgement and will judge it down, because they thought and perceived afterwards towards the proclamation of Jonah, and look, here greater than Jonah’, (Matthew 12 v 41). See also: Luke 11 v 32. At one point Jesus sent his disciples out in pairs and in Mark’s gospel we read, ‘Going out they proclaimed and heralded in order that they [the hearers] think and perceive afterwards’, (Mark 6 v 12). 

There we see the meaning of the call to repentance.

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [3] – Repentance [1 of 12]

 What happens when a Christian engages in wayward behaviour that God disapproves of? Christians often talk about ‘repentance’, by which they often mean feeling a sense of regret and turning back to God with sadness and grief at their wayward behaviour, together with a resolution and desire not to repeat it. But what do the Hebrew and Greek words translated into English as ‘repent’ actually mean?

There are lots of calls to repentance in the New Testament, particularly in the gospels with regard to Jews. We also see such calls in the Old Testament, where the Hebrew word is ‘shuwb’, a verb meaning ‘to return’ or ‘to turn back’. It’s first use is in Genesis 3 v 19 where Adam was told that he will work hard until he returns to the ground and returns to dust. Similarly in Genesis 8 v 3 it describes the floodwaters turning back, and in Genesis 8 v 9, it refers to the raven that Noah sent out from the ark returning back to the ark. In I Kings 8 v 47 it is used with regard to Jews returning to and pleading with God, confessing their wayward and wicked behaviour. 

The near-equivalent New Testament Greek word is the verb ‘metanoeó’, from ‘metá’, which can mean ‘with’, ‘after’ or ‘among’; and ‘noiéō’, from a root word meaning ‘mind’ or ‘intellect’, and thus ‘noiéō’ is taken to mean ‘perceive’, ‘understand’, or ‘think’. As a result, ‘metanoeó’ means ‘to think and perceive with or afterwards’. It occurs 34 times in the New Testament. The Greek word is more differentiated than the Hebrew word, such that it does not precisely mean the same thing. In the New Testament, the word often translated into English as ‘repent’ is actually focussed on the ‘mind’ – on thinking and reasoning things through to a conclusion after something has been said or done. Unlike the Hebrew word it is not primarily focussed on behaviour, and in some of the next posts we will see that some of the texts clearly indicate this more specific focus on the mind. 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [2] What the Apostles did NOT teach

 The Apostles taught that Christians are called or summoned to engage in the process of living a godly life, a life set apart from the principles and values of the worldly arrangement. Before I look at how the Apostles encouraged Christians to put such a life into effect, it is important to note what they did not teach, because numerous errors have crept in to Christianity over the centuries. 

The Apostles did not -

Make appeals to the external commandments of divine Law, using them as a ‘spur’ to ‘goad’ Christians towards godliness and avoidance of sin. 

Encourage Christians to adopt an attitude of self-surrender, so as to ‘stop struggling and making the effort, and rather let go and let God do the work’. 

Make appeals to the feelings or emotions of Christians as a basis for their behaviour. 

Exhort Christians to seek transcendent or ecstatic experiences as a means of empowerment over sin. 

Encourage Christians to punish their own bodies in order to purge out sin.

Rather, the Apostles constantly appealed to the minds of Christians by presenting ‘spiritual’ knowledge – enlightened knowledge away from the Breath of God that in turn leads to underlying principles of speech and behaviour. ‘Outsiders’ or ‘unbelievers’ cannot, by their own ability away from their deep inner core, be persuaded of such knowledge and principles to the point of obedience. The Apostles encouraged Christians who were receiving enlightened knowledge to think this knowledge through to its logical conclusion, to use their ability to think, evaluate, comprehend and analyse. They exhorted Christians to apply this knowledge and its conclusions by means of engaging in enlightened mastery and ‘possession of their vessel’. Christians were to carry this illuminating knowledge from their hearts and minds across into their behaviour moment-by-moment, within the sphere of practical, beneficial love. The Apostles exhorted Christians to harness the wayward raw passions, desires and energies that are still inherent in their fleshly constitution, and to ‘walk around within the Breath’ and build up their allotted inheritance within the heavenly realm. They taught that when Christians persist in ungodly, worldly behaviour, they incur a degree of loss of their portion of the divine inheritance – not a loss of deliverance itself – but a loss of some of their portion of the treasure of the divine inheritance. 

Principles of living a set apart, godly life [1] Introduction

 I want to understand the Apostle Paul’s approach to the principles of practical daily Christian living. Most particularly I want to see how he approached problems, errors and failings when it came to Christians living a godly life set apart from the values and principles of the world. The assembly at Corinth had its fair share of problems. Passionate arguments, divisions and schisms arose from out of spiritual ambition. One Christian was engaging in an outrageous sexual relationship that was shocking even by the worldly standards of ‘outsiders’ and bringing the assembly and the gospel into public disrepute. Christians were going to non-Christian lawyers to settle disputes between themselves. There were issues concerning marriage and the roles of males and females. Christian involvement with regard to other religions was also a cause for concern. There was an element of excessive liberty and permissiveness within the assembly. There were also concerns around the role of females with regard to authority within the assembly. Problems were evident with regard to attitudes towards the Lord’s Supper. Many in the assembly had a misplaced ambition when it came to divine favours or spiritual gifts. There was a degree of disorder in worship meetings. And last of all, some within the assembly were denying the rousing up from out of the dead.   

How did the Apostle deal with these matters? It is clear that he presented a foundation of spiritual knowledge - theology - as a basis for Christian behaviour. Sometimes he appealed to ‘what is written’ in the Hebrew Scriptures. Sometimes he pointed to historical examples concerning God’s chosen ethnic group, the Jews. Very occasionally he expressed his personal opinion. He used reason and logical arguments to come to conclusions and establish principles with regard to godly behaviour. He then made practical applications and exhortations in which he sometimes encouraged his Christian readers to likewise think things through for themselves. In the light of such enlightened knowledge, teaching and reasoning things through for themselves, he exhorted Christians to exercise self-control and to be unified in their perspective, behaving in a way that was consistent with what they came to understand as opposed to following their fleshly impulses. ‘Therefore do not let loss and self-forfeiture reign within your mortal body towards attentively listening and obeying under its eager desires’, (Romans 6 v 12). The impetus of a godly Christian life is away from worldly speech and behaviour that God disapproves of, and towards speech and behaviour that is clean and set apart from the world. So the question I am asking is this - in what particular and specific ways did Paul and the other Apostles encourage Christians towards this godly way of living?