Principles of living a godly life [74] - The Breath working alongside

 ‘But also, in the same way, the Breath [Pneuma] is joining with assertively taking hold of helping our weakness. For we do not know precisely what it is necessary and proportionate to pray for, but the Breath [Pneuma] itself makes intercession with inexpressible groans and sighs. 27 Now the diligent searching of the hearts perceives what the thoughts, purposes and inclinations of the Breath [Pneuma] are, for down from God set apart above, it is striking the mark’, (Romans 8 v 26, 27).   

Paul has said that despite the present suffering, (verse 17, 18), Christians, ‘by means of steadfast endurance’, (verse 25b), eagerly await the end result of their deliverance, namely ‘the full ransom and release of their body’, (verse 23b). But there is more. The Breath of God is joining by taking the initiative and assertively taking hold of helping Christians in their weakness and lack of strength. What does Paul mean when he refers to the Christian’s ‘weakness’? He tells us right away. Christians don’t know ‘precisely what it is necessary and proportionate to pray for’. They don’t know what would really be best for them or what God might be willing to grant them. They are to a great extent still ignorant of the character of God, the reasons for His dealings, the principles of His government, and their own real needs, such that they are sometimes in real, deep perplexity. They are surrounded with trials, exposed to temptations, potentially subject to debilitating illness, and to calamities. Asking for the right things to the right degree and proportion is the difficulty, and it arises in part from the dimness of their vision of heavenly realities in their present state, during which they have to ‘walk by faith, not by sight’. But the Breath is ‘in the middle’ as it were, to intercede. The Breath enters above and beyond to make petitions and make appeals that hit the mark spot on.  

‘The diligent searching of the hearts perceives what the thoughts, purposes and inclinations of the Breath [Pneuma] are’, (verse 27). The ‘diligent searching and examination of hearts’ is an indirect linguistic expression that refers to a particular and unique ability of God. Because neither good angel messengers, nor bad angel messengers, can search into the hearts of human beings. Neither can an individual human being know the heart of another, nor can any individual fully know even his or her own heart - this ‘searching of hearts’ is the prerogative of God. This diligent searching of hearts, of the Christian’s deep inner core, means that God knows ‘what the thoughts, purposes and inclinations of the Breath [Pneuma] are’. The heart constitutes the deep inner core, the ground, of an individual’s thoughts, emotions and intentions and it is where the Breath resides. The Breath is making intercession for the Christian, and God knows and perceives the movement of the Breath, not only because He searches hearts, but also because the Breath is down from God and is striking the mark ‘spot on target’.  

Principles of living a godly life [45] – Self-forfeiture, loss and divine law [2]

 ‘Then the good became my death? It cannot come to be! But self-forfeiture and loss, in order to be shown self-forfeiture and loss, is fully working out my death by means of the good, in order that self-forfeiture and loss comes down self-forfeiture and loss beyond measure, by means of the injunction’, (Romans 7 v 13).

Earlier in his letter to the Romans, Paul said, ‘Law is working down settled anger’, (Romans 4 v 15a). He is explaining that statement here. He anticipates a final objection, namely that good, divinely approved law causes his death. Once again he phrases the objection in the form of a rhetorical question – ‘Does good law become my death?’ Does the cause of my death, my condemnation and loss, lie with good, divine law itself? Is divine law the cause of my death, my withering away? Once again he dismisses such a suggestion – such a thing cannot come to happen. 

He then describes the dynamic process once again. It is a slightly complex verse but lets go through it bit by bit. The core of his reply to this objection is that his self-forfeiture and loss already existed, but he did not know it until law came along. Before divine law came along he existed in relative ignorance and considered himself free to behave as he pleased. By means of the injunctions of divine law, Paul came to know self-forfeiture and loss existing within him and he began to realise that he was enslaved to it. In order to be seen to be self-forfeiture and loss, self-forfeiture took hold of the initial starting-point provided by divine law. Self-forfeiture roused up to life and by means of good divine law, it fully worked out towards his death. Every facet, aspect and form of self-forfeiture and loss roused up within him, (verse 8a), with regard to this or that particular injunction. He became aware that he was self-forfeiting in his words, in his behaviours, in his thoughts, in his intentions and in his desires and inclinations, such that his self-forfeiture and loss, and his awareness of it, increased. He came to know more and more aspects and facets of, and the greater extent of, his self-forfeiture. By means of good divine law ‘coming in’, self-forfeiture and loss came down beyond measure – there were too many instances of it to count - and as such it was clearly seen to be self-forfeiture and loss. In the light of divine law there was no doubt that self-forfeiture and loss existed, in abundance. But divine law itself did not cause his self-forfeiture. Rather, divine law revealed the extent and degree of his self-forfeiture, such that it was clearly seen to be self-forfeiture. 

Principles of living a godly life [44] – Self-forfeiture, loss and divine law [1]

 ‘Because self-forfeiture and loss, having taken hold of a starting point by means of the injunction, thoroughly deceived me and by means of it, slew me. 12 So that therefore law is indeed set apart, and the injunction set apart, righteous and intrinsically good’ (Romans 7 v 11, 12).

If we are in any doubt as to what Paul has been saying in the previous verses, he restates what he said in verse 8 so that we are clear what happens to us as ‘unbelievers’ existing within the realm of the flesh. Paul says, ‘I encountered knowledge gained by means of divine law and I initially thought it was a means to gain and maintain divine approval – ‘Do this and I will live’. But instead, self-forfeiture and loss took hold of an initial starting point presented by means of the injunction or commandment. 

Here is the principle or the fundamental process –

Knowledge of divine law raises our self-forfeiture and loss to life, which then begins to take hold within us

By means of the knowledge that he gained from divine law, self-forfeiture and loss thoroughly deceived Paul. He initially supposed that he was going onward to life and that divine law would lead him to life, to divine approval. But self-forfeiture and loss roused up by means of knowing the law, deceived him and slew him. Knowledge of his self-forfeiture put him to dying away and death. By means of the law he found that his self-forfeiture and loss was much greater and more extensive than he initially thought when he first encountered the injunction. 

So this is Paul’s reply to the objection that he stated in verse 7 – ‘Shall we say ‘The law of self-forfeiture and loss?’ Is it divine law itself that creates self-forfeiture and loss within us? On the contrary, divine law itself is good, clean and set apart, and God judicially approves the injunction.

When Christian legalists are faced with those Christians who say that they are freed away from law through the Messiah, they sometimes make out as though such Christians are saying that divine law is ‘bad’, or that the law itself creates self-forfeiture and loss. In reply they then firmly insist that divine law is good and right, and that it promotes cleanliness and godliness, and that David loved divine law, (Psalm 119 v 97, 113, 163, 165). They imply or even say directly that if you do not love divine law and look to it as a means to promote a godly life then there is something wrong with you as a Christian. They question your loyalty to God or even whether you really do believe after all.   

Nevertheless, despite these protests by Christian (or Jewish) legalists, Paul says in verse 6, ‘But now we [Hebrew Christians] are rendered entirely idle away from the law’. He agrees with legalists that divine law is good and judicially approved. But he also says that by means of divine law, self-forfeiture and loss is roused up and is revealed to reach every part and facet of our being. Divine law is not leading to life and holiness, but to withering away and death – to divine condemnation.

I point out once again that at the moment Paul is still looking at those who know law but who are walking around day-by-day down from their flesh, down from the inclinations of their long established physical constitution. He is looking at those who are not entrusting God and His Messiah. 

However, he has one more anticipated objection in mind before he turns his attention to Christians.

Principles of living a godly life [42] – Human nature and divine law [2]

 ‘But self-forfeiture and loss, having taken hold of a starting point by means of the injunction, fully worked to fashion within me every aspect of inordinate desire’, (Romans 7 v 8a).

Paul has just said that by means of Covenant or divine law he knows what self-forfeiture and loss is. Covenant Law defines self-forfeiture and loss. Divine law sets boundaries on thoughts, emotions, intentions, speech and behaviours, revealing what God approves of and what He disapproves of. 

So what happens? Knowledge of self-forfeiture and no receipt of a portion (of the divine inheritance) is gained by means of knowing divine law. But knowledge of divine law means that self-forfeiture and loss actively takes hold of a starting point and opportunity presented by means of the injunction. Talking about himself, Paul says that the knowledge of self-forfeiture conveyed by means of divine law fully worked to completion within him. Knowledge of self-forfeiture with regard to covetousness fully worked down within him to produce and accomplish an end result. Namely, this knowledge fashioned and formed all of the individual parts and aspects of covetousness, focused passion, yearning and lusting. The knowledge that Paul attained by means of divine law - that passionate, lustful desire was prohibited - also presented within him the opportunity, the opening and starting point for self-forfeiture and loss. His awareness of what self-forfeiture and loss is with regard to covetousness sprung to life and it worked within him to form self-forfeiture and loss with regard to every aspect of passionate, lustful desire that he possessed. His awareness of self-forfeiture and loss because of his covetousness increased, he saw it as being present in so many aspects of his passionate desires. But it was not the law itself that was producing this result, but rather the ‘self-forfeiture and loss’ within him. It was everywhere within him, often in subtle and unexpected ways. 

The Greek word that Paul uses is ‘hamartia’, which is almost universally translated into English as ‘sin’. In its more strict definition it is a noun derived from ‘A’ – ‘not’ or ‘no’, and ‘méros’ – ‘a part, a share of’, and it emphasises its self-originated or self-empowered nature – in other words, this loss of a share is not originated or empowered by God. Thus, in its fullest sense it is ‘self-forfeiture leading to no-share or portion of the divine inheritance’. It was this ‘self-forfeiture and loss’ that was working within Paul and producing every kind of form of covetousness, which had been defined by divine law. Passionate desire was present in him before he encountered divine law, but knowing the law constituted the initial starting point of knowing the presence and extent of self-forfeiture and loss, which worked within him to form many instances and aspects of self-forfeiture and loss in relation to his passionate desires.

At this point in his discussion, Paul is still thinking primarily of the dynamic process that takes place within ‘unbelievers’ – who are walking around day-by-day down from their flesh, because they are enslaved to their natural, earthy, ancient humanity or physical, fleshly constitution. In other words, this is the dynamic process that takes place when unbelievers encounter divine law. Paul does not introduce the present tense until verse 14. From verse 7 to 13 he uses the past tense, which means that he is referring to himself before God brought him forth. 

Principles of living a godly life [41] – Human nature and divine law [1]

 ‘What then? Will we say ‘The Law of self-forfeiture and loss’? May it not be caused to happen! However, I would absolutely not know self-forfeiture and loss if not by means of Law, for also I would absolutely not know covetousness if the Law had not said, ‘You will not covet’,’ (Romans 7 v 7). 

In verse 5 Paul said that ‘when we existed within the flesh, the passions, the self-forfeiture, actively and effectively worked within our limbs and members through the means of the law, penetrating towards the bringing forth of fruit, the death’. Paul also says elsewhere that ‘law entered close beside in order that the falling away became greater in number’, (Galatians 5 v 20). Law increases the amount of transgressions and the wayward raw passions and energies inherent in the fabric of our fleshly constitution are working in our limbs by means of the law. In other words, divine law is not leading ‘outsiders’ or unbelievers to live a life of set apart cleanliness at all. But when Christians are brought forth by God they are rendered idle with regard to serving God within the sphere of the law.

So Paul immediately anticipates another objection from those who know the law. He frames the objection in terms of a rhetorical question. ‘What then? Will we say ‘the Law of self-forfeiture and loss’?’ Will we say that the Law is at fault? Is Law failing in the purpose of producing cleanliness? Is the Law creating self-forfeiture and loss in us? He answers immediately. ‘May it not be caused to happen!’ 

To illustrate his point he quotes the beginning of the tenth Commandment, ‘You will not covet’, (Exodus 20 v 17; Deuteronomy 5 v 21). The word ‘covet’ means ‘to have focused passion’, ‘to yearn for’, ‘to greatly desire to do or have something’, ‘to long for’, ‘to desire very much’, or ‘to lust after’. Mosaic or Sinai Covenant Law takes an enormous step forward in advance of many other ancient codes, because most of them stopped short at actual action or behaviour. Just a few went on to speech, but few if any laws addressed an individual’s thoughts or passions. But divine law says, ‘You will not covet’, you will not hold on to the thought and passionate desire for something. Coveting proceeds from our heart or deep inner core, (Proverbs 6 v 25), and when it carries across into our behaviour it brings forth self-forfeiture and loss, the thought and desire is brought to completion in the act. 

Paul says ‘in the absence of divine law I would not know that if I covet then I self-forfeit incurring loss. Covenant Law is the means by which I know that I am self-forfeiting. Until the law revealed it, I had no knowledge or consciousness of divine disapproval, self-forfeiture and loss with regard to coveting.’ Without doubt there were those who desired their ‘neighbour’s wife, or his manservant, or his maidservant, but before the giving of Covenant Law this would not be readily perceived as a divinely disapproved-of desire for that which was forbidden. Because no written code existed to reveal that God disapproved of such passionate desire. The Apostle did not know covetousness as something that was disapproved-of by God until he was confronted with the law opposing it. The desire might have existed within him, but he would not have known that God disapproved of it to the point of his self-forfeiture and loss. The written codes of divine law place boundaries on his desires, as well as his speech and behaviour, teaching him what God judicially approves of and what He disapproves of. Divine law teaches where lawful indulgence ends, and where self-forfeiture and loss begins.

It is not Divine Law itself that is missing the mark, nor is it failing. So what is the dynamic process that happens? Paul is about to tell us.

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 [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 [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 [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 [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?