Three times in this short epistle Jude addresses his readers as beloved (Jude 1:3, 17, 20). In the Gospel narratives the word is used only of Jesus, but in Acts and the epistles it is often used of brethren who work diligently on behalf of the Gospel. However, it is usually used, as it is here in Jude, as a way to address all believers in Christ. Read the rest of this entry »
The apostles wrote of the last time or the last days as though they referred to a season that would occur in their expected lifetimes. Were they wrong? If they were wrong about how soon Jesus would return, how are we able to conclude that anything they claimed about Jesus is true? James wrote of the last days as days of judgment (James 5:1-5). Peter spoke of our eternal inheritance, which concerned the Lord giving us eternal life, and this was reserved for us in heaven and was ready to be unveiled in the last time (1Peter 1:4-5, 20). Just before his death, Peter spoke of scoffers who would deny Christ, and they were then present in what Peter referred to as the last days (2Peter 3:1-5). Jude, the brother of James, wrote of ungodly men who had already crept into the church pretending to be brethren, but they loved this world and sought to take advantage of and separate the brethren for their own gain. Jude wrote of his days being prophesied as the last time (Jude 1:3-4, 15-19). Read the rest of this entry »
In the third chapter of his epistle, James gets down to the nitty-gritty. The empire-wide trial that had come upon the churches of God had to do with false doctrine spread by false teachers. This was an organized conspiracy begun by Annas, the high priest of Jerusalem, the very same who had Jesus crucified. It was a secret plan, whereby he had planted false brethren throughout the Christian assemblies in Asia, Galatia and Greece, similar to the Ananias and Sapphira incident of Acts 5. Paul knew about the plan, but, of course, was not privy to the identity of the false brethren. He told the churches in Greece that the conspiracy was already at work (2Thessalonians 2:7), but Paul’s presence among the churches in the area was enough to keep secret plan from gaining a strong foothold. Read the rest of this entry »
James addressed his letter to the twelve tribes scattered abroad. Although gentile believers would be affected by what James wrote, we need to keep in mind that James’ main consideration was believing Jews, because the persecution that came after Paul’s imprisonment was aimed at these believers. Knowing this, some of what James said was probably encoded to keep the enemies of the Gospel from understanding the true intent of this epistle. Moreover, it is probably true that James was executed by Ananias, the high priest and son of Annas (cir. 62-63 AD), for writing this very letter, and his stoning took place not long after Paul left for Rome in chains. Therefore, his letter had to have been written before this time, but probably closer to James’ death than nearer to Paul’s arrest. Read the rest of this entry »
I believe the epistle of James was written at least partially in code, and this was done for the safety of many of the believers still living in Jerusalem, Judea and Galilee. If Annas was indeed behind an empire wide effort to destroy the nascent church, he would have been given a copy of James’ letter by one of the false brethren Annas had planted in the churches abroad.[1] Notice that James had sent his letter during a time of trial (James 1:2). James’ letter comes at a time when some very impressive men had arisen within the churches, in the form of converts or perhaps visitors (James 2:1-3). In any event, James reminded believers that it was such as these who had oppressed them in the past, and had charged them of wrongdoing in the courts. What seems to have occurred was: these high ranking Jews (visitors or recent ‘converts’) were being favorably treated above the faithful who were not so highly recognized in Jewish society. Read the rest of this entry »
from Google Images
The church at Ephesus had tested those who had pretended to be apostles and found them to be impostors, but one has to wonder how such people could ever have gotten to a position within the church, where it became important to understand their motives. Paul spoke of people who had followed up on his ministry in Galatia in order to undo the work he had done there for the sake of the Gospel. He said they were “false brethren brought in unawares, who came in secretly to spy out our liberty, which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage” (Galatians 2:4). He later described such folks as false apostles, deceitful workers who sought to be seen as ministers of righteousness (2Corinthians 11:13, 15). Their purpose was to divide the flock into parties or sects through flattering words and an appearance of the love for the truth (cf. Romans 16:17-18). Read the rest of this entry »
from Google Images
Obviously, we cannot know who the men from James really were, but in another blog[1] I wrote some time ago I argue that they were probably very notable men, perhaps powerful Jews who worshiped with the brethren at Jerusalem. It is unlikely that either Peter or Barnabas would have been seduced doctrinally. That may have been a problem at Galatia with the new believers, as well as the new gentile believers at Antioch, but Peter and Barnabas were teachers of the word of God. Their seduction came by way of pleasing men. In other words, they were intimidated in the presence of men from James. They changed their behavior, not their doctrinal understanding. They acted hypocritically, that is, not according to what they knew to be correct. Read the rest of this entry »
from Google Images
Paul tells us in Galatians 2 that, while Peter was staying at Antioch, Paul confronted him over an incident that developed over a visit from men sent by James. It may be that after the death of James, the brother of John, in Acts 12 that Peter fled to Antioch, a place out of the jurisdiction of King Herod Agrippa. While Peter was there he had no problem eating with his gentile brethren. However, everything changed, when the men from James arrived. Presumably, they had been sent to alert the Christian communities among the gentiles (viz. at Antioch and the churches in Galatia) that the predicted famine (cp. Acts 11:27-29) had arrived and Jerusalem’s reserves for the poor were dangerously low. They needed help. Read the rest of this entry »
from Google Images
Circumcision was a religious ceremony, which was given to Abraham for the purpose of expressing devotion to God. It became the official sign of the covenant between God and the Jewish nation in the time of Moses. Although the rite represented the circumcision of the heart, Paul opposed its requirement for gentile believers, maintaining that all believers are justified before God by faith in Jesus Christ. The rite itself was merely a religious ceremony of Jewish tradition, which had no inherent saving value. What was important was the spiritual meaning of the tradition. Circumcision, which represents our dedication to God, is not a physical matter but spiritual. It is, therefore, a heart issue not something that can be witnessed by one or more of the five senses. Read the rest of this entry »
from Google Images
From the very beginning of his letter to the Galatians Paul identifies himself as an apostle by Jesus Christ and the Father. He words it this way: “an apostle not of man…” presumably because it had been told the Galatians by Jewish visitors that Paul’s apostleship was given him by one or more of the Twelve, and probably Peter figured prominently in their story. The sense is that if he was ordained by men, Paul couldn’t preach anything new. His Gospel must be the very same as the Gospel preached by those at Jerusalem. Read the rest of this entry »
Luke ends his thesis in Acts 28:30-31, showing Paul in his rented house welcoming all—Jews or gentiles—who would come to him, and there he preached the Kingdom of God and those things that concerned the Lord, Jesus Christ, with no one forbidding him. Luke shows us that Paul did this for at least two years, and afterward nothing more is written about Paul or anything further about any of the acts of the Apostles. This, I believe, is meant to be the end of Luke’s thesis. It is not an accident than nothing further is written. Acts has a real ending, and it ends here. Read the rest of this entry »
Did the Gospel make a huge leap forward in its quest to reach all nations by going to Europe? Well that is a question others wiser than I will have to answer, for it is true both sides of the Aegean Sea shared many similarities, including a common language, similar political governments and religious traditions. Nevertheless Paul and company were called through a vision to specifically preach the Gospel to Macedonia (Acts 16:9-10). Read the rest of this entry »
Many Biblical scholars seem to think Paul’s conflict with Peter at Antioch occurred after the Jerusalem Council. I don’t believe that reasoning is correct. In his letter to the Galatians, Paul claimed that he visited Jerusalem twice before he wrote his epistle—once three years after his conversion (Galatians 1:18), and a second time fourteen years after he met Jesus on the Damascus road (Galatians 2:1). Some scholars conclude that Paul either missed a visit (Acts 11:28-30; 12:25), or Paul’s visit fourteen years later occurred during the famine, and the Jerusalem Council visit occurred sometime later, perhaps after he left Corinth in Acts 18. Nevertheless, the ‘two’ are the same visit. That is, the Famine-Relief visit and the Jerusalem Council visit were one and the same visit, and occurred cir. 49 CE. Read the rest of this entry »
Smoodock's Blog 