The Spirit's Orchard

Galatians: A Study of Christian Freedom

Lesson 18:  The Spirit’s Orchard  Galatians 5:22-25^_

Paul presented a dark picture when he introduced the "works of the flesh."  Now, he presents another picture, one with promise and hope.

If the “works of the flesh” may be described as “obvious,” in the sense that they are so-often seen, these virtues are rarer, harder to find in human behavior.  As we look at this passage I think we will appreciate the beauty of the Spirit’s orchard.

²² By contrast, Clearly Paul is inviting his readers to contrast these two lists. Think of how ugly that first list is, how beautiful this list is.  Paul invites us to ask, What kind of person do I want to be, the person who exhibits the characteristics on the first list or the person who exhibits the characteristics on the second list? If you want to be known as a “first-list” person, you don’t have to do a thing; if you want to be a “second-list” person, Paul will show the way.                 

the fruit of the Spirit is

The qualities of the first list are the out-workings of who we are in an unredeemed state, sinners, estranged from God, doing those things we ought not to do and leaving undone those things we ought to do.  The qualities of the second list result from the supernatural working through our personalities.  The Holy Spirit working within us creates these qualities.

Let me deal with an issue passages like this raise.  It involves a question philosophers and theologians have been debating for centuries:  Can we be good without God?  That is, are we capable of being morally upright without some acknowledgement of God?

Of course, we could argue from the outset that “the works of the flesh” condemns those attempting to be good without God from the outset.  In its broadest sense, “idolatry” implies a wrong view of God and certainly any view of God that denies God’s  existence or God’s right to our allegiance, is, Biblically speaking, a wrong view.  As such, by definition, they cannot claim to be good.  Of course, some might say this is just sophistry, a clever or not-so-clever word-game to avoid the fundamental question.  Can we be good without God?

It goes without saying that there are good (kind, merciful, patient, generous) people who have no apparent recognition of God or practice no religion, so far as we know.  At the same time, there are those who openly deny the existence of God while being good neighbors, better neighbors, sometimes, than professed believers.  Of course, those philosophers and theologians are quick to point out that these individuals may be living in ways that do not fit the implications of their worldviews. 

Beyond this, we have to keep in mind that some of these qualities Paul lists have theological or spiritual dimensions, that require faith in God.  We’ll see that as we go through the list.  In other words, while some atheists may be better neighbors than some theists, when we look at the virtues Paul describes as “the fruit of the Spirit,” we have to say that none of us can be this good without God.

Remember, when Paul speaks of “the fruit of the Spirit,” he uses the singular.  This is not a fruit bowl filled with a variety of fruit, depending on the season.  The expectation seems to be that each of these virtues will be present when the Spirit is working in our lives.

Let’s take a closer look.

love, Many see this virtue as the one out of which all the others grow.  We have already defined love in an earlier lesson.  We said it was a benevolent good will that actively seeks the good for another.  We desire to see that good worked out even in the lives of those who have determined to be our enemies.  The person who claims to always demonstrate this kind of good will toward others without the help of God is either the most remarkable person we might ever hope to meet or is utterly self-deceived.

joy, One translator renders this as “exuberance about life.”  Certainly that is part of what Paul has in mind.  But there is more in mind here.  It is a condition linked to the character of the gospel.  Fourteenth century English reformer John Wycliffe defined the gospel this way:

Euangelion (that we cal the gospel) is a greke word, and signyfyeth good, merry, glad and joyful tidings, that makyth a mannes heart glad, and makyth him synge, daunce, and leep for joy.

We have this joy because God is at work in our lives to accomplish what we could not accomplish on our own—our salvation. 

Wycliffe says the gospel inspires those who receive it to “synge.”  Christianity has a rich musical heritage generated, in part, by the good news of the gospel. 

Then, too, this joy has enabled countless Christians to hold onto their faith in the most difficult of circumstances.  We need to remember that joy, unlike happiness, is unrelated to our circumstances.  Consider what Paul wrote to the Thessalonians.

 You became imitators of us and of the Lord, for you welcomed the message in the midst of severe suffering with the joy given by the Holy Spirit. (I Thess. 1:6)

Of course, the great example of this is Jesus.  Though he faced opposition during his ministry, he knew joy.  Consider this moment when he saw hints of God working in the lives of his followers.  Luke 10:21 tells us that when those followers reported success on their first mission tour “Jesus overflowed with joy from the Holy Spirit.”  Ultimately, his joy was linked, not to outward signs of success—there weren’t any on Calvary, but to the knowledge he was following the Father’s will.  The writer of Hebrews encourages believers to be inspired by Christ’s example:

…let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross… (Hebrews 12:2)

Does Paul mention joy at this point because he sees it threatened in the Galatian churches?  The joy that should have marked their fellowship was being threatened by the conflicts and divisions that appeared to be growing in the church.  Then, too, their joy was being threatened by the false teachers who were calling into question the basis of their salvation.  If so, he may have seen that these things were also threatening the next Spirit-generated virtue he mentions. 

peace, This is another virtue linked to the saving work of Christ.  Paul would write the Romans, “Therefore, since we have been justified by faith (been declared righteous by faith), we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.”  The New Testament sometimes speaks of peace reflected in an untroubled heart (John 14:27) and of peace reflected in harmonious relations with those from whom we might ordinarily be estranged (Eph. 2:14).  Whatever other peace the Christian may know is rooted in that peace, peace with God. 

I shared Joseph Thayer’s definition of peace with you a few months ago but it bears repeating.  This Greek scholar says peace is "...a conception peculiar to Christianity, the tranquil state of a soul assured of its salvation through Christ, and so fearing nothing from God and content with its earthly lot.”

This peace should have kept the Galatians from falling for the false teachers’ spiel, put their fleshly thinking seems to have interfered as they began to ask themselves, “Is there something more I should be doing?”

With these three virtues—love, joy, and peace—firmly established in our hearts, our relationship with others will be different as these next virtues suggest.

patience, That’s a good translation but you have to appreciate the Authorized Version’s “longsuffering.”  Another translations has “an even-tempered forbearance.”  Not, bad but it just doesn’t beat “longsuffering.”  Whatever word we use, we know that patience is a quality that is hard to achieve.  Yet, it is so much needed in our lives as Christ’s People.

We need it as we do the work of evangelism.  There have always been obstacles to persuading people to believe but in an age where it has never been easier to communicate our message to millions, it is equally easy for the opponents of the gospel to get their message out.  We need patience.

We need it as we teach.  Whether we are teaching children or adults, teaching can be challenging.  We know it can be tough teaching wiggling pre-schoolers but, today, we are facing more and more adults who have no understanding of the basics of the Christian message.  Even worse, so many of them have been given the wrong idea of what Christianity teaches and who Christians are.  It demands patience to “unteach" so many things.  Think of Jesus:  for three years he taught the disciples and on the eve of the crucifixion, they still didn’t get it, still didn’t understand what he was about.  Talk about needing patience.

We need patience in our relationships.  Whether we are dealing with a neighbor, a fellow church member, a co-worker, our children, or our spouse there are times when we need patience.    More and more of us are finding that we need patience, not only with our children, but with our parents, especially as they age and face the challenges that brings.  All of this, by the way, assumes there will be times when these people need patience with us.

I could go on but I’d risk talking too long and you might lose patience with me.

kindness, With “kindness,” Paul introduces a series of virtues that demand outward expression.  It’s possible to argue that “love, joy, peace, and patience” are all qualities we might be able to possess without outwardly expressing them (though, the fullest definition of “love” implies action).  That’s not so with “kindness” and the remaining virtues Paul lists.

Having said that, we need to look closer at this word and the next generosity because they are complementary.

“Kindness” translates “chrēstotēs” and speaks of treating someone with “gentleness,” as used in several translations.  “Generosity” (from agathōsynē ), in the NRSV, is not a bad translation so much as a limited one. “Goodness,” found in several translations, is better.  But keep this in mind, when we display our generosity by giving to some charity like the Red Cross or the United Way, our objective is to do good.  

Here we can begin to see how these words complement each other.  Each has “good” as an objective.  “Kindness” (chrēstotēs) seeks the good of another through a soft or gentle approach.  “Goodness” (agathōsynē) often takes a sterner approach.  As R. C. Trench says, it includes “qualities by which doing ‘good’ to others is not necessarily by gentle means.”

Jesus is our example.  Think of how he is portrayed in the encounter with the woman caught in adultery; after her pitiless accusers leave, he lifts her to her feet and says, “Neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more.”  Or think of his dealings with the tax-collector, Zacchaeus; Jesus changes this outcast’s life by treating him courteously and having lunch with him. Now, contrast that with his dealing with the unscrupulous money-changers in the temple; he drives them out.  But his actions still have good in mind: He wants to keep the poor worshippers from being cheated, restore dignity to the temple, and recall the nation to true worship.

[On this Fathers’ Day, we should remember how much parents need to know when to be “soft” and when to be “stern.”  We need the wisdom of the Spirit.]

faithfulness, The Authorized Version’s “faith” is a proper translation of the word “pistis” but so is “faithfulness.”  To a degree, given Paul’s effort to impress upon the Galatians the message of justification by faith, rather than works, the first might fit.  But given the specific context, the second meaning seems better. R. E. Howard says,

Throughout the New Testament pistis relates primarily to the believer’s complete dependence upon the work of Christ.  However, these fruits of the Spirit are ethical virtues dealing primarily with interhuman relations.  Pistis does, in a few instances, have the ethical meaning of “faithfulness,” which is obviously how it it so be understood here. As such it depicts loyalty, trustworthiness, and dependability.^_

This faithfulness, according to The Message, is seen as “we find ourselves involved in loyal commitments.”  In a sense, it complements “patience” because the same situation that demands our patience may also call for this kind of stick-to-it dependability. 

²³ gentleness, This a word Jesus used early in his ministry when he said, “Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth.”  It is sometimes, translated as “meekness.”  The Greek word praus, was sometimes used for a horse that had been tamed.  It is strength under control. 

William Barclay describes this quality as it works itself out in life:

It is when we have [meekness] that we treat all with perfect courtesy, that we can rebuke without rancor, that we can argue without intolerance, that we can face the truth without resentment, that we can be angry and yet sin not, that we can be gentle and yet not weak.

Jesus would use the term to describe himself, “Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and humble in heart:and ye shall find rest unto your souls.” 

and self-control. When we looked at “the works of the flesh,” we saw that several implied loss of control.  If the “meek” are the strong who keep their strength under control, here is that self-control as a product of the Spirit’s work within us.

Do you remember Matthew’s account of Jesus being arrested in the garden?  Peter tries to prevent it but Jesus stops him.  He says, “Don’t you realize that I could ask my Father for thousands of angels to protect us and he would send them instantly?  But if I did, how would the Scriptures be fulfilled that describe what must happen now?’

With the cross looming before him, Jesus shows self-control.  Because of his self-control, we can know salvation.  Later writers would appeal to Christ’s self-control to encourage Christians to face insult and provocation without retaliation.

Paul ends his list with an understatement.

There is no law against such things. I can picture Paul’s tongue firmly planted in his cheek as he says this.  After all, what kind of culture would make these virtues illegal?  Paul’s comment invites us to use our imaginations as we make some observations.

Observations

Imagine a transformed world.  Think of “the works of the flesh.”  Many of our laws have been enacted to restrain the unbridled expression of those traits.  Imagine a world where division, feuding, rage, jealousy, envy, and even selfishness were replaced with kindness, patience, trustworthiness, benevolence, and thoughtfulness. Imagine a world where you did not fear for the safety of your daughter or son walking across the campus late at night, a world where the holiday highways would not be made dangerous by drivers who knew “when to stay when” but wouldn’t.  That would be a transformed world.  But that is  a world transformation no legislature or parliament can produce.

This is a transformation possible only as individuals “walk with the Spirit,” as they open themselves to the work of the Spirit to overrule their natural tendency to rebel against God, their inclination to think only of themselves, and their eagerness to plunge into self-destruction in the name of freedom. 

The Bible nowhere allows us to imagine that this present world will ever know a time when the rebel flags will forever be lowered, when our daily lives will reflect the reality of the words we have looked at today.  Still, there have been times when we’ve caught a brief glimpse of what it might be like.  Like Camelot, they have existed for “one brief shining moment,” but they have existed.  No, not all over the world but in small communities of faith.

Shortly after the Day of Pentecost, when the church was born, that band of new believers experienced a transformed way of life. Listen to Luke’s description:

 Acts 2:43 Everyone was filled with awe at the many wonders and signs performed by the apostles. 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. 46 Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, 47 praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

  This didn’t last long but long enough for believers to look back with yearning for such times to be known again.

At the beginning of the 20th century, in some of the little Welsh mining communities, the Holy Spirit moved; a great awakening came and life was temporarily transformed.  So many people were converted that jails, once filled with drunks on Saturday nights, sat empty and judges were told there were no cases to be tried. 

We can’t legislate this into reality, but we can pray for the fruit of the Spirit to be flourish in our churches.

Imagine a different picture.  Last time I talked about the picture of Dorian Gray and behind the facade there is an ugly portrait reflecting the fallenness of humankind, a picture of what we might be but for the grace of God.

Today we have looked at a different picture.  But whose picture?  I’ve given you several hints.  As we look at these virtues Paul calls “the fruit of the Spirit,” we see a picture of Jesus Christ.  He revealed each of these in his life and ministry. 

It is a reminder of what the Spirit wants to do in our lives.  The Spirit wants to reproduce the character of Jesus in our lives. 

In Ephesians 2:10, Paul says we are God’s “workmanship.”  The word can be translated as “work of art.”  Think of all the artists who have produced paintings of Jesus through the centuries.  Each is different but when you look at them you recognize Jesus.  In the same way, when we allow the Spirit to produce this “fruit” in our lives, we will possess different personalities, different temperaments, different styles, but when people look at us they will recognize Jesus.

Will we let the Spirit do his work?

Not a Pretty Picture

Galatians: A Study of Christian Freedom

Lesson 17:    Not a Pretty Picture  Galatians 5:19-21, 26

In 1891, Oscar Wilde published his only novel, The Picture of Dorian Gray, a story made into film some fifty years later.  The novel begins as Dorian Gray, a handsome, charming young man is having his portrait painted.  As he looks at its beauty, he realizes it will stay the same as he ages.  Thinking about this he says he would sell his soul if it could be the other way around:  if the painting could age while he remained youthful and handsome.  Well, of course, that’s just what happened.

No matter how self-indulgent or wicked his life, Gray stayed the same while his portrait, hidden away from sight, changed, reflecting the impact of his debauchery.  In the end, it revealed a horrifying picture of corruption and ugliness.  You never know how much psychological analysis to apply to a story like that but Wilde may have been saying that all of us are like that, we all present one “picture” to those we meet while the true “picture” is hidden away.

The description of human behavior Paul lists in these verses is not a pretty picture.  Yet, we need to look at it to see the true state of human beings without God.

¹⁹ Now the works of the flesh are obvious:

Lists of condemned behaviors were often found in literature of the day.  Paul uses the device to show what being “fallen” really means.

To whom are these words addressed? It seems that both unbelievers and believers may exhibit “fleshly” behavior.  When unbelievers exhibit fleshly behavior it is to be expected; they can do no other; their behavior reveals their identity.  When believers exhibit fleshly behavior it is a tragedy; their behavior belies their identity.  

Paul isn't talking about something mysterious:  When the flesh has its way, it is “obvious.”  The word Paul uses suggests they are not only obvious; they are well-known.  Several of the words are synonyms but there are nuances that show the breadth of the bad behavior Paul has in mind.  Some commentaries suggest Paul begins with behaviors most Christians would quickly condemn, then he moves into those attitudes and behaviors that some would excuse.

Remember the old joke that has a very conservative Christian guy declare during testimony time at his church, “I don’t dance, drink, smoke, or chew and don't go with girls who do.”  The notion that we can escape indictment as “sinners” by avoiding certain vices is an old one.  Yet, our identity as sinners is revealed in many ways.  In this brief, ugly list Paul focuses on a few of these ways; when we examine the list carefully we will find that many of these vices are not limited to those saloons and dance halls that Christian guy would never enter.  In fact, some of these vices may be found in his church.

 fornication, a general term that can refer to a variety of sexual activities condemned in the Bible, such as sex outside of marriage, adultery, prostitution, incest.  The TCV translates it as “sexually unfaithful.”

Such behavior is a problem in every age.  Historians report that some upper-class Roman women had their names added to the official lists of prostitutes so they would not be subject to prosecution for their many affairs.  In Puritan Massachusetts adultery was the most common charge dealt with by the church courts.  

I’m not well-versed enough to compare our situation with ancient Rome but our attitude toward sexual license has changed in my lifetime.  In 1948, popular actress Ingrid Bergman saw her career in Hollywood end because an adulterous affair; she was condemned in newspapers across the nation.  Today, actors and actresses living together while they wait for divorces is old news; if the couple is particularly popular, they might be receive a magazine cover and an article wishing them the best of luck.

impurity, this word tends to deal with our inward condition, our motivations that generate our behavior.  So, impure acts flow from impure hearts.

licentiousness, refers to no-holds-barred behavior, especially in the area of sexuality

²⁰ idolatry,   the worship of idols, common in the Greek and Roman world, long a stumbling block for the Jews.  In a general sense, this could refer to any form of false religion or placing trust and finding security, not in God, but in things.

sorcery, the Greek word is pharmakeia from which we get words like pharmacy or pharmaceutical and recalls that some witchcraft of the age involved using drugs.  The idea may suggest using any substance to lose control.  David Guzik writes, “Morris defines sorcery as ‘the use of any kind of drugs, potions, or spells.’ In the ancient world, the taking of drugs (especially hallucinogens) was always associated with the occult, and the Bible’s association with drug taking and sorcery points out that drugs open up doors to the occult that are better left closed.”

Paul wrote that warning almost two-thousand years ago but “recreational drugs” still have an appeal.

In the end, sorcery and witchcraft reflect an attitude that suggests the supernatural may be manipulated by a few tricks and the right words.  The TV evangelist who tells you to send in $10.00 and God will turn it into $1000 may be asking you to play that game.

enmities, this is the first of several words that deal with our relationships with one another; this word carries the idea of a long-term state of discord, a feud like that of the Hatfields and the McCoys.  Can this feuding be found among Christians?  In New Orleans, on one street corner there is the New Hope Baptist Church.  At the end of the block, on another street corner, there is another church, the Greater New Hope Baptist Church.  The church names tell the story.

Paul would appeal to a leader at the Philippian church to help two quarreling women to make peace:  “I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord. Yes, I ask you also…help these women.”  (Phil. 4:2-3)  Paul urged them “to iron out their differences and make up” since “God doesn’t want his children holding grudges.” (The Message)  Long term feuds can harm communities, families, and churches.  

strife, this suggests a sudden altercation, although it may refer to having a contentious spirit. (During the 1920s, Texas Baptist leader J B Gambrell wrote J. Frank Norris, telling him that he did not need to attack other Baptists because there were plenty of problems outside the church to take on and satisfy the most “pugnacious spirit.”).

jealousy, a word that suggests a malicious envy; this kind of jealousy not only wants what you have but wouldn't mind hurting you to get it.  

The late Calvin Miller had great insight into the human heart, including the foibles and failures of Christians.  In one of his books, he wrote of the jealousy that some pastors have toward other pastors.  Miller says, “While I was pastor of a suburban congregation, I often saw churches competing with one another.  I saw pastors who couldn’t afford to like each other, lest it blunt their competitive edge to outgrow each other.  To be the best in the city ruled their suburban, church-growth game… They believed that they would spend eternity with those comrades, but they were in no sweat to practice that distant koinonia.  There would be time for loving each other later.  For now they must outdo each other in member-recruitment wars.”

anger, this suggests a sudden fury; if one chariot driver accidentally cuts off another, that other driver might throw his spear in a fit of road rage. Think of this as the classic “temper fit.”  Paul told Timothy that church leaders should “not be violent; but gentle, not contentious.”  In saying that such leaders, both pastors and deacons, should be “sober” and “self-controlled,” Paul may mean they should not be subject to these rages.  

quarrels, the idea here is conflict born out of selfishness, rather than genuine disagreement over a substantive issue; it’s a conflict that can lead to division as the next two words suggest.

 dissensions, the word suggests “a standing apart;” this is the person who won’t join in, won’t agree to go along if the majority favors another course. Picture that person who stands outside the group, arms folded across his chest and a scowl on his face. This is not taking a stand for right over wrong, it is pouting because you didn’t get your way.

factions, the Greek is hairesis from which we get “heresy” and it is often translated as “sect” in the New Testament.  It is never used in a positive sense.  The root idea is to make a choice, particularly in a religious matter, that leads to creating a narrowly-focused group.  I think it’s fair to say we see this “work of the flesh” expressed when a person or group obsesses over an issue, when it becomes all-important and the basis for fellowship.

²¹ envy, jealousy mingled with spite.  Perhaps Paul risks redundancy or repeating himself to mention such feelings again because he had so often been the object of this kind of envy and jealousy, especially from those who resented his successes.  

He will end this section on the flesh versus the Spirit with one more such such warning in verse 26: “Let us not become conceited, competing against one another, envying one another.”  The word translated as “become conceited” is found nowhere else in the New Testament; it means to have “a state of pride that has no proper basis.”  The kind of envy that can divide a church and impede its progress is often rooted in the envy exhibited by those who “think more highly of themselves than they ought to think,” as Paul says in Romans 12:3.  Though such divisive people may claim to be led by the Spirit or have the best interests of the church at heart, they don’t.  In fact, the word translated as “competing” or “provoking” in other translations (also used only here in the NT) has the idea of picking a fight.  That’s what the people Paul is talking about are willing to do.  They see everything as a competition and must always be the “winner.” 

[Some translations add the word “murders” to the list; it is missing from too many ancient manuscripts for most newer translations to include it.  However it is easy to understand why a scribe might have added it as a comment on “envy” (perhaps in the margin from which it eventually crept over into the text).  Sometimes such envy can be so intense it inspires murderous feelings.  At it happens, the word Paul uses is used to describe the feelings of the authorities who had plotted Jesus’ death.  (See Mt. 27:18)  Such envious people don’t always commit murder but they may be willing to destroy churches or reputations.]

drunkenness, this comes from the word for “strong drink” and losing control from over indulgence.

Throughout much of Christian history the church’s attitude toward alcohol has been acceptance; in fact, alcohol, especially wine, was sometimes seen as a gift of God.  Martin Luther praised his wife Katherine for the good beer she brewed in their kitchen.  Teetotalism, the complete renunciation of alcoholic beverages, is relatively rare.  That changed in the 18th and 19th centuries among some Christian groups.  These Christians may have embraced teetotalism as a radical but effective solution to the problem of drunkenness.  For example, in America at least, drunkenness was a great problem, especially on the frontier.  In the early 20th century, evangelist Billy Sunday made signing a pledge to give up alcohol a requirement for those making professions of faith at his crusades.  Eventually, in the view of those who rejected alcohol, a fellow Christian’s opinion on alcohol was a basis for determining the depth of his or her commitment. This judgmental attitude is wrong.

In a culture, where getting “smashed,” “wasted,” or “hammered” is considered the highlight of a great social occasion, rejection of alcohol may be the appropriate response.  Still, this is a matter on which good Christians disagree.  Paul’s warning to the Ephesians, while not forbidding alcohol, is a warning every Christian should hear:  “And do not get drunk with wine, for that is dissipation, but be filled with the Spirit.” (5:18)  Interestingly, “dissipation” can refer to something that is being slowly wasted.  

carousing, the word means “merry-making” but whenever it is used in the New Testament is refers to a what several translations refer to as “orgies.”  Again, the idea seems to be a situation in which all self-control is abandoned.  

and things like these. That phrase “covers” a multitude of sins.  Paul seems to be signaling that his list is by no means exhaustive.  Certainly the characteristics he mentions are sufficient to  portray the ugliness of fallen humanity, humanity estranged from God.

Having made that list, he issues a warning.

A Warning

I am warning you, as I warned you before: those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. 

This is a frightful warning.  The Voice paraphrase puts it this way:  “I told you this clearly before, and I only tell you again so there is no room for confusion: those who give in to these ways will not inherit the kingdom of God.”  

Harsh as that may sound, it is fully understandable.  These behaviors are “works of the flesh.”  The flesh refers to unredeemed humanity.  Therefore, those who practice these things are continually giving evidence of being unredeemed.  They have no place in the Kingdom because the Kingdom is no place for them.  

At the same time, Paul is by no means suggesting salvation by self-effort.  That is, he isn’t saying, Rid yourselves of these vices and you will be admitted to the Kingdom; that, of course, would be a heartless thing to say since he has already shown that on our own we possess no power to transform ourselves.  Yet, sometimes the church has forgotten this.  It’s message has not been the gospel with its emphasis of the transforming power of the Spirit but a message of moralism with its emphasis on extraordinary human effort.  This had the effect of discouraging those who knew they couldn’t make the cut and deceiving those who thought they had. 

So, what is Paul’s point.  What Paul is saying is fully consistent with what he has said before.  One writer says, 

“Those who receive the Spirit experience a moral transformation by the directive power of the Spirit (5:16-18). If there was no evidence of moral transformation, then there was no basis for claiming the presence of the Spirit, and hence there was no basis for claiming justification by faith. And if they had not experienced justification by faith, then of course they would not inherit the kingdom of God.”

This passage is not a full-fledged explanation of eternal punishment.  Rather, it is a warning that on our own we are not fit for God’s Kingdom.  So, you would be wise not to attempt to enter it on your own.  As Someone once said, “You must be born again!”

Conclusion:

The other day Pat and I saw a children's book that talked about the strange sayings Grandma might use.  It featured what a child might think when grandma or someone else might use a phrase like “when pigs fly,” “bright eyed and bushy tailed,” or “a horse of a different color.”  Sometimes we hear a phrase that we need to remember when we consider what Paul says here, “There but for the grace of God, go I.”

As ugly as this list might be, we seldom see all of these traits bound up in one person.  We seldom meet a real Dorian Gray.  

The Bible suggests that there are God-given restraints that prevent us from indulging in all the vices we might indulge in.  We are all sinners but most of us are not the worst possible sinners.

In the eighteenth century, a man wrote that in his early life he was“an infidel and libertine.”  He was proud of his wanton lifestyle that included the licentiousness Paul mentions and his ability to “invent new blasphemies.”  He said, "I sinned with a high hand…and I made it my study to tempt and seduce others.”  His life was an ugly picture.

Then he met Christ and everything changed.  In time, he would reflect on his life and write a poem called, “Faith’s Review and Expectation.”  You may have never heard of it but you’re about to sing it. (Amazing Grace)

Two: A Tribute to a Christian Couple

Two

Sometimes, due to unforeseen circumstances, I have had to shorten or even delete parts of a planned sermon.  Occasionally, I have added explanatory or background materials to a sermon on this blog.  So, once in a while the sermon presented here is longer than the sermon I preached.  This is the rare occasion when the sermon presented here is shorter than the sermon as preached.  This message was part of a tribute to a couple who were leaving our church, retiring to Florida after many years of serving the church.  The omitted materials were examples of their service to our church.  These omissions do not impact the Biblical lesson.

Acts 18:1 and  others

In some religious traditions there doesn't seem to be too much room for the wife.  Some extreme forms of these religions forbid women to drive, deny them the right to an education, and insist that the may not leave the home without being accompanied by the husband or a male relative.  

From the beginning Christianity at its best—like Judaism at its best—recognized the contributions women could make to the spiritual community.  Both Jews and Christians see Proverbs 31 as a word-picture of a “noble woman.”

We sometimes forget Christianity gave women a place of honor, respect, and equality which was almost unparalleled in the ancient world.   When Paul addressed the relationship of husband and wife, as Dr. H. Schumacher, a Roman Catholic historian, argues, the apostle "...raises the status of the wife far above that accorded her by contemporary views to that of full equality with her husband."  

A Christian Couple

With this in mind, we shouldn’t be too surprised when Luke introduces us to a Christian couple who made a difference in the life of the early church.

 ACTS 18:1 After this, Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. 2 There he met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them, 3 and because he was a tentmaker as they were, he stayed and worked with them.

   Because of their strict lifestyle and their radical monotheism, Jews who were faithful to their religion were not always welcome in the larger Roman world.  Some Romans didn’t trust them and many just didn’t like them.  Claudius ordered the Jews to leave in one of the many purges the Jews would endure throughout history.

    Although it does not say so  here, subsequent material makes it clear that this husband and wife were Christians.  Despite the disruption they had experienced, they opened their home to Paul.  Here Paul would have both a comfortable place to stay and regular meals; moreover he would have something to do that would add to his income, ease his conscience about depending upon their hospitality, and help him find a break from the demands of his ministry.

If this were all we knew of Priscilla and Aquila, they would merit our appreciation for the hospitality they had offered Paul.  We discover more about them when they were on the road again.

On the Road Again 

18 Paul stayed on in Corinth for some time. Then he left the brothers and sisters and sailed for Syria, accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila. Before he sailed, he had his hair cut off at Cenchreae because of a vow he had taken. 19 They arrived at Ephesus, where Paul left Priscilla and Aquila. He himself went into the synagogue and reasoned with the Jews. 20 When they asked him to spend more time with them, he declined. 21 But as he left, he promised, "I will come back if it is God's will." Then he set sail from Ephesus. 

  

Once again, the couple was uprooted and settled in a new community.  This time the move was made without the prompting of an imperial edict.  Apparently they felt they might be able to aid Paul’s ministry further or somehow advance the kingdom.  Doubtless, Paul felt the same way.  I think verse 19 probably means Ephesus was where Paul would eventually leave Priscilla and Aquila.  In any case, he doesn’t seem to have planned to remain there long, since he was determined to return to Jerusalem.

We don’t know all that these two newcomers may have done in Ephesus but there’s no reason to doubt that they immersed themselves into the Christian community there.  They would have worshipped with their fellow believers and helped “disciple” any new believers who might have responded to the church’s witness.  

Sometime after Paul left the couple behind they had an opportunity to make another important contribution to the work of the church.  That opportunity came when they met another man whom we would dearly love to know more about.  They met a fellow Jew from the fabled city of Alexandria, a city known for its beauty and for learning.  Alexandria had a library with some 700,000 volumes.  

24 Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.

Luke’s account of the early church focuses on a handful of workers:  Peter, Stephen, Philip, and, of course, Saul/Paul.  Others appear in the account only long enough to whet our appetites for more information.  One of these men was Apollos, a Hellenistic Jew from Alexandria, who appears to have been a scholarly and skilled teacher.  Yet, in the early days following his conversion to Christ (Luke gives no details of that conversion) his understanding of the faith was somehow deficient.  Luke reports that two Christians heard him and recognized his need for further knowledge.  So, “Priscilla and Aquila …took him aside and explained the Way of God to him more accurately.”   Fortunately, Apollos heard them with humility and went on to become a powerful and effective witness.

As we read this account, notice their courtesy and discretion in dealing with Apollos.  We’re told “they took him aside,” so as not to embarrass or undermine his ministry.  The word translated “took aside,” can mean to befriend or show hospitality.  This is why several translations render the words as “they took him home with them.”  This commitment of their time made a difference in Apollos’s ministry that is impossible to measure.

Sometime later, Priscilla and Aquilla were on the road again, again.

On the Road Again, Again

The couple, originally evicted from Rome during a pogrom against the Jews, appears three more times in the New Testament.  In each case, they are actively involved in the work of the church. 

In I Corinthians 16:19 we learn they were probably still in Ephesus and there was “a church in their house,” that is, they had opened their home for a band of Christians to meet in.  They were most likely teachers in this “house-church.”  Interestingly, Apollos had an active ministry at Corinth; so they had indirectly been a continued blessing to the church they had left behind when they moved to Asia Minor.

Romans 16:3 suggests they were, at least temporarily, back in Rome.  The ban on Jews in Rome had been lifted in AD 54 so this would have been after that.

Then, 2 Timothy 4:19 puts them back in Ephesus.  

Of course, this still doesn’t give us as many details as we would like about the double.  Consider this, for example.

When Paul commended them in his letter to the Romans, he said, “ Greet Prisca [a diminutive form of Priscilla] and Aquila, who work with me in Christ Jesus,  and who risked their necks for my life, to whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles.”  

Wouldn’t it be great to know what circumstances prompted that statement? But we are left only to imagine what Paul was referring to.

With all this in mind, let me move on to some observation about these two.

The Two

What can we say about Priscilla and Aquila that might be instructive to us today?

1. They ministered where they were.

Every place they moved they quickly got busy ministering.  So fare as we know they never suffered fro a crippling nostalgia.  Think about this.  They were unjustly forced to move from Rome where they probably had a successful business to the wicked seaport of Corinth. Yet they ministered.  For the sake of the kingdom, they were willing to move from Corinth to Ephesus where the people not only worshipped the gods they worshipped in Corinth, some of the people even worshipped snakes.  Yet they ministered.  They seem never to have said, “If only we were back in Rome, then we could do something for Christ.”

They ministered wherever they were and wherever they were they found opportunities to minister.

Back to Priscilla and Aquila.

2.  They ministered in a way that complemented each other as they pursued a common vision.

One commentator says of Priscilla and Aquila that we never see them apart.  They are only mentioned together.  They worked side-by-side for Christ.  As such, they stand as an inspiration to every Christian married couple, reminding them of how they might  build the kingdom together.

But back to Priscilla and Aquila.  Doubtless, even though the Bible doesn't mention it, they had different talents or what we would call “skill-sets” today.

True, we never see either working alone, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t.  

We might imagine either Priscilla or Aquila working alone in a local church but this would be pure speculation.  What’s less speculative is that we can probably be sure each allowed the other to devote the time and energy needed to exercise whatever personal gifts they might have possessed.

Once again, as we look at Priscilla and Aquila, we see…

3.  They ministered by taking people under their wings.

“Mentoring” is too formal a word for what Priscilla and Aquila offered.  As we’ve seen, they were there with friendship, counsel, and hospitality to support and help.  Whether it was the famous missionary Paul or the fledgling evangelist Apollos, they were willing to open their home and provide what each needed.  In the case, of Apollos they gave him instruction and guidance that made him even more effective and accurate in his ministry.  In the case of Paul, they offered a place to stay and an opportunity to work with his hands.  We don’t know who else in Rome, Corinth, or Ephesus might have heard the names of Priscilla and Aquila and said, “I know them, the made a difference in my life.”  You can bet they were there.

Conclusion:

Of course, this message is about Priscilla and Aquila, two people that Luke didn’t really have to tell us about.  A modern editor might have said, this story about Paul making tents and Apollos getting it wrong detracts from the story line.  Omit it.

Thank goodness the story is there.  It reminds us that when a tireless, fearless missionary  was tired and afraid, God sent someone to help him regain his strength.  It reminds us that when a brilliant teacher needed to be taught, God sent someone to instruct him with tact and love.  It reminds us of how couples can make a difference.  It reminds us how God cares for the church, though the people he sends at just the right time.