Have You Ever Read Ephesians?

Purpledawn, Please explain what you mean by this.Do you mean that Jesus Christ presented NO concept of a universal church ?When Jesus said " ... I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:18b) do you think He was refering ONLY to the believers in Jerusalem ?I think He was refering to His believers throughout everywhere on earth disciples would be made. He had told them - "Go therefore and disciple all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19) The teaching of a Christian church from Matthew 16 must be a concept of a universal church. It must be as the aggregate of all local churches together throughout all time until His return.My suspicion is that what you really mean is that when Paul wrote there was no concept of the Roman Catholic Church. That would be true. I submit that is not true that the apostles at the time of the writing of Ephesians had no concept of the church universal.I would concede that the first Jewish disciples in Jerusalem were slow and reluctant to spread the message beyond their nearby neighbors. God took care of that by allowing some persecution to scatter them abroad, taking the gospel with them to other cities (Acts 8:3,4).Luke writes in Acts 9:31 of the church [singular] throughout Judea - Acts 9:31 - "So then the church throughout the whole of Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace, being built up; and going on in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it was, multiplied." I submit that "the church [singular] throughout the whole of Judea and Galilee and Samaria" has to be considered as the universal church spreading and multiplying throughout other regions beside Judea and its city of Jerusalem.Ie. - the church universal had peace as she grew and spread. I think this review of the history according to Luke is in perfect agreement with Christ's teaching of taking the Gospel throughout the earth bringing people into the church - into the kingdom of God.Comment ?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Keep on track.

---

I don't think I left the track PD. You propose and idea as evidence that Paul was not the author of Ephesians.You said the universal church espoused in the letter seems untimely.
Its mention is pre-mature and thus indicative of a frabrication.I think the mention of the church universal is not at all untimely.

quote:

---

This debate is about Ephesians and Ephesians was either written by Paul or by another.

---

The church is a big big subject in the book of Ephesians.
This book is not honing in on individual spirituality such that God has a lot of miscellaneous spiritual people running around.The subject matter has very much to do with God building them together into a corporate expression. A corporate Body of Christ each one of these believers is a member of.This book elevates the Christian's view to see things from a higher perspective. That is from the heavenly viewpoint of God above.If I understood you right, I gather you find this aspect of Ephesians a tell-tale evidence that someone other than Paul was writing. You suggest a real letter by Paul to Christians (perhaps in Ephesus) should be void of so much universal church teaching.I think this is incorrect. Paul would have spoken much about the big picture of God's operation. In Second Corinthians, which I don't think many dispute as to Pauline authorhip, he gives his autobiography as an apostle of Christ.He includes transcendent visions which were so broad and so extensive that he had to be given a physical ailment to humble him from getting too lifted up. "And because of the transcendence of the revelations, in order that I might not be exceedingly lifted up, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh ... in order that I might not be exeedingly lifted up." (See 2 Cor. 12:7) Paul keeps his experiences secret for 14 years. Finally he is forced to inform his more skeptical members of the church that he was carried away to paradise, carried to the third heavens, carried below to the deepest parts of the earth. He does not know whether it was physical or in some kind of trace state. But he heard unspeakable words and apparently saw supernatural things which most of us have yet to see.So it is evident that having these extensive visions high and low of God's plan for the universe, his letters would include trancendent teachings like the church universal and triumphant.

quote:

---

I have presented the idea that it is written by another as a summary of Paul's theology.

---

Is it more of a summary of Paul's teaching than the book of Romans ?Is it more of a summary of Paul's teaching than First or Second Corinthians ?I see a significant highlight of Paul's teaching presented nearly as much in Colossians or Galatians or [/b]Philippians for that matter.

quote:

---

The link I provided in Message 79 listed several reasons why Ephesians is not considered to be written by Paul. I quoted this one.

---

Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

The authentic letters are written to specific groups and dealing with specific issues that concern that group.

---

The building and the future of the church universal is as much a "specific issue" as in any other letter.Christian disciples open to the apostle, maturing, reaping the benefits of his ministry would grow to have the conscerns that their spiritual leaders had. It is no anomaly that an eager audience could be draw out of Paul his deepest enthusiasm for his calling. He would share with them all that is within him to share.I'm sorry. But I find your first rational here completely unrealistic.
Why would the ultimate future of the church NOT be a "specific issue" to the Christians under the apostle's ministry ?You think that there was no one in the early churches who became enthusiactic about the big picture of God's overall purpose ? You think Paul had no listeners who wanted to share with him in cooperating with God for God's eternal purpose ?

quote:

---

Paul presents his arguments to back up his instruction.

---

A eager and enthisiastic church well could be ministered to with little polemic argument. Not every church had to contain skeptical elements questioning Paul's apostleship, doubting his motives, forcing the defending of his teaching.It is not an anomaly that some churches at some times required less polemics and forced self vindication. At times the Apostle surely had wide open door before him to share what was on his heart in a high way.There is no reason to think that in every church Paul had to wipe snotty noses and change diapers. Some audiences contained a sizable enough component of more mature believers who could take in Paul's big picture.I believe that the 13 or so epistles of Paul display variety of levels of reception, trust, and maturity.

quote:

---

Ephesians doesn't seem to provide the in-depth arguments that Paul does.

---

It is no anomaly that here and there the apostles had a more mature audience who required less polemics.Spiritual experience ebbs and flows. Some congregations have high times after a revival. They alternately may experience low ebbs when a lot of problems distract them.Why is it hard for you to consider an audience going through a season of revival, enthusiasm, dedication, deeper consecration who are able to forget about their own petty concerns long enough to receive some higher teaching? "What does God want?" can sometimes occupy the believers rather than constant self centered attention of Christ only fixing this or that personal problem or even congregational problem.Jesus said "Seek FIRST the kingdom of God and all these things will be added to you." The audience of the Ephesian epistle may have gotten their minds off of a lot of minor things to draw forth from Paul his "high peak" and transcendent bird's eye view of it all.Besides in the Ephesian epistles there are also some down to earth exhortations and instructions.

quote:

---

I would say the arguments for what is being said in Ephesians can be found within Paul's letters.

---

The arguments are also found in other NT writings. The language may be different.Paul's Body of Christ can be compared to John's record of Jesus speaking about the True Vine and the abiding branches (John 15)Paul's habitation of God in spirit can compare with John's record of Jesus teaching about "My Father's house" in chapters 1,2, and 14 of JohnPaul's builded temple of God can be compared to the builded church and the keys opening the door to the kingdom of the heavens in Matthew 16.Paul was faithfully teaching and carrying out what he received from his Lord the resurrected Christ. And Christ was working through the apostles what He had taught in His ministry before and after His cross.

quote:

---

To see the authentic letters as summaries of Paul's teachings, one would need to know what Paul's teachings were outside of the letters. We don't have that information that I know of.

---

It is not necessary that we have all the apostle Paul's words.
I don't believe that it was in God's will to preserve all of Paul's words.I believe what we have is inspired, canonical, and adaquate to know what foundation Paul laid for the Christian church.John said Jesus did and spoke things which could fill enough books that the world could not contain them. In spite of this what we have tells us the major things we have to know about what Jesus Christ taught and did.The 13 or so epistles of Paul are adaquate along with Luke's history in the book of Acts to know the major work and teaching of the Apostle Paul and his co-workers.The work of discerning which letters were authentically apostolic and Pauline, I think, was done centries ago by Christians who cared, were not naive, and sorted through a plethora of religious writings to recognize authority and inspiration.These ancient Christian brothers were hundreds of centries closer to the events than your latter skeptics. I think you're trying to re-fight a battle which was already fought and decided by scholars almost two millennia closer to the events.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Sorry, jaywill - I forgot about this one (post 75). I hope to get to it, but let me pose an unrelated question to you (apologies to Phat again - still in Eph 1).
Why does 1:13 of all the verses in this section mention 'you' and not 'we' or 'us'?

​

Someone had mentioned that chapter one has only three sentences and chapter two begins with 'And', connecting it to the apostle's prayer at the end of chapter one. Chapter two begins with 'An[d] you...'

​

Any ideas?

---

No problem on the delays.Verse 1:13 mentions "you" and not "we" like many other verses? "In whom you also, having heard the word of the truth, the gospel of your salvation, in Him also believing, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of the promise,

​

Who is the pledge of our inheritance ..." I don't know why only "you" appears in verse 13. My guess would be that this phase of his encouragement is related to the Gentiles. For it is the Gentiles, the "you" in that sense, who are being joined to the commonwealth started by God with Israel.Ie. "So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God." (2:19) But it might be interesting to go through the whole epistle and count up the "you's" and the "we's, us's" .I am still puzzling over purpledawn's complaint that there is a lack of "specific issues" in this epistle.Well, anyway, Paul is praying for the recipients of his letter that they "go higher" in a sense. He certainly wants them to see more in the spiritual realm. You know the OT said "Without a vision the people run wild." .Paul prayed that they would see the issues of the real hope of their calling - " ... in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you a spirit of wisdom and revelation in the full knowledge of Him,

​

the eyes of your heart having been enlightened, that you may know what is the hope of His calling, and what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints,

​

and what is the surpassing greatness of His power toward us who believe .... etc. etc. etc." (verses 16 - 19 and on)He wants them not to take Christ for granted. More they need to realize. This is a specific issue - the need for deeper and more extensive realization of the worth of Christ.The whole idea of someone other than Paul having to fabricate this kind of summary on Paul's behalf seems curious a suscpicion to me. Why not Paul did so for himself ?Purpledawn says in essence - "But it would be more like Paul if he were arguing and debating on behalf of his ideas."How about he also be PRAYING for the saints that they understand his revelation and grasp his messages ? " I also ... do not cease giving thanks for you making mention of you in my prayers ..." Okay. In Galatians he argues more.
In Ephesians he says he bows his knees and prays without ceasing for them.Same man purpledawn. The same man with the same concern.So in the Corinthians letters he defends, he argues, he is like a lawyer before the court. In Ephesians, it is not another Paul. It is the same man praying hard this time more than reasoning by way of polemic argument.In some other letters he argues that they would see.
In Ephesians he PRAYS that they would see.I know we are still discussing chapter 1. But in chapter 3 he apparently knew he had reputation among the Ephesians of speaking high and glorious revelation - "If indeed you have heard of the stewardship of the grace of God which was given to me for you, that by revelation the mystery was made known to me, as I have written previously in brief.

​

Bt which in reading it, you can perceive my understanding in the mystery of Christ, which in other generations was not made known to the sons of men ... etc. etc. etc. " (vs.3-6) This is interesting too. Paul says he wrote "in brief". We might consider that to mean a letter of his did not contain a lot of argument. He took for granted that his audience was with him. So he once before wrote "in brief".He prayed much and he wrote "in brief." I think we have a genuine letter here from the apostle Paul.Does not the book of Acts tell us that the Ephesians burned all their magic books in enthusiasm for the Gospel? All those other teachings added up to a lot of money Acts 19:17-20) .I think these Ephesian Christians went through a season of being very opened to Paul's ministry. They touched this rich Christ and wanted more. And Paul could pour out everything within him because of this.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Whether the letter is pseudographic or not does not change the contents of the letter.

---

It is evident that in some cases it was important to Paul that the readers knew for certain it was his own hand writing - "See with what large letters I have written to you with my own hand." (Galatians 6:11) I don't think this reflects an apathetic attitude about the Galatian churches knowing that it is himself, Paul, who is writing this epistle.In the Thessalonian letters Paul warns that it makes a difference that they know they are receiving teaching from him or from someone else pretending to be him - "That you be not quickly shaken in mind nor alarmed, neither by a spirit nor by word nor by a letter as if by us, to the effect that the day of the Lord has come." ( 2 Thess. 2:2) Whose writing you are actually reading, is important to Paul. The churches surely should not be lax about it. They would be discerning and careful.In the First Thessalonian Paul spends considerable space reminding the young believers how he and his co-workers behaved among them. It is not just his teaching which he wants them to consider. He wants them to remember his behavior, his service, how he and his co-workers conducted themselves and the loving care the Thessalonian Christians received.This is not academia. The life testimony of Paul in their midst is as vital for them to remember as his teaching.I am a little suspicious of too much attitude "Oh it doesn't matter if Paul really wrote this or whether an imposter, a fraud, a pretender, a good intentioned LIAR was imitating Paul."This thought of "Oh they didn't care" or at least "Oh, it is still useful thought a fraud is instructing the churches in Paul's name."If someone came to your house and used your PC in this forum and under your tag of purpledawn, expressed something, I think you would want to clarify the record to the Forum. "That was written by someone else in my name."I think the early brethren (our brethren as fellow believers to some of us here) cared to separate the authentic from the non-authentic.Now to the seasoned Greek language scholar who has valid questions about style of writing - Paul worked with co-workers and helpers and "team members".Ie. "I, Tertius, who write this epistle, greet you in the Lord." (Romans 16:22) At the very end of this letter of basic Pauline teaching we have this little indication that Tertius was writing down from Paul's dictation.I think the letter was read back to Paul. It is not impossible that some grammatical adjustments may have been made and run past him. He okayed the final product.I was tutored by a Greek teacher who wrote a text on Greek in order, so he said, to learn the language better. I would not presume to argue with him for a moment. And he, an expert, had doubts about at least one letter having been attributed to Paul. This was based on grammer and style.I would not presume to correct this expert. But my personal belief is that some letters were written in a team coordination -====================================
"Paul and Timothy, slaves of Christ Jesus, to all the saints ... who are in ... Philippi." (Phil. 1:1) "Paul, a called apostle of Christ Jesus ... and Sosthenes the brother to the church of God which is in Corinth." (1 Cor. 1:1) "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus ... and Timothy the brother, to the church of God which is in Corinth ..." (2 Cor. 1:1) "Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus through the will of God, and Timothy the brother to the saints in Colosse" (Col. 1:1) Paul and Silvanus and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians ..." (1 Thess. 1:1) Brotherly teamwork and coordination was being practiced here. Paul and Silvanus and Timothy to the church of the Thessalonians ..." (2 Thess. 1:1)
==================================This kind of coordination I can accept the early saints often expected. Forgeries and pseudonames during or after the departure of the early apostles, I think, if the churches were on the look out, would be handled with keen caution. I don't think "Oh it doesn't matter who really is writing us" I was that loosely applied.Second Ephesians ( Christ's letter to the church in Ephesus in Revelation) shows the disciples on the lookout for being misled by phony apostleship - " ... and you have tried those who call themelves apostles and are not, and have found them to be false." (Revelation 2:2b) Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The church universal, as I used in means the total body of believers in all localities through out all ages since the church's beginning in Jerusalem.It would include living believers as well as departed believers.The universality is indicated in Ephesians chapter 2 where Paul uses the phrase "you ALSO are being built together into a dwelling place of God in spirit." (Eph. 2:22 my emphasis) The audience in Ephesus is being built ALSO into that one temple building of God. I don't think Paul means the Ephesian Christians are part of a habitation of God which includes just Ephesus and Colosse, or just Ephesus and Corinth, or just Ephesus in Laodicea, or just Ephesus and Rome.I believe Paul means the Ephesian Christians are being built into that habitation of God in spirit which includes all who have the Spirit of Christ in a universal way.This building is universal and built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Jesus Christ as the cornerstone (v.20).This universal body is also the wife that He came to die for in a universal way - "For a husband is head of the wife as also Christ is Head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the Body ... Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her that He might sanctify her, cleansing her by the washing of the water in the word,

​

That He might present the church to Himself glorious, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing ... we are members of His Body ... this mystery is great, but I speak with regard to Christ and the church." (See 5:22-32) He is speaking of the aggregate of all believers throughout all the earth and throughout all the ages.It is the aggregate of all the sons of God which God planned to present before Himself in love - "Even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blemish before Him in love." (1:4) Sorry to spring a unfimaliar phrase on you. But this we may refer to as the universal church since it universally includes all who are the sons of God. He is working on them to present them all holy and without blemish which is the same as presenting the Bride and Wife to Himself not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing in chapter 5.The Ephesians are included in something much larger than just themselves. They ALSO are being built into this "universal" habitation of God in spirit.He is speaking of the New Jerusalem at the conclusion of the ages as seen in Revelation 21 and 22. She is universal and victorious and includes all who have become sons of God. "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal.3:26) So when Jesus refered to the church that He would build which the gates of Hades would not prevail against her (though they try), is the universal church. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Testing, 1, 2, 3.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I'll go further than that. I'll suggest Ephesians chapter 5 in its entirety is absolutely wonderful.Now of course people can and always will sit down to a turkey feast only to hunt for a bone to choke on. Afterall the Bible even says "Money solves everything" in Ecclesiastes. Why not forget the whole thing?Why not blame all the greed and economic problems of the world history on Judeo / Christian tradition - they're the ones who said "Money solves everything" (Ecc. 10:19) So I guess for a few posts we are going to have to wrestle with the gender equality issue.Now Paul's instruction in Ephesians 5 has a crucial component which most people ignore. His exhortation before his instructions to wives, husbands, children, slaves, and masters is this: "And do not be drunk with wine, in which is dissolution, but be filled in spirit ... (v.18) As Christ is doing the sometimes "painful" process of transformation (only painful in that we LOVE ourselves so much) He can only do so by us being saturated, permeated and steeped in the Holy Spirit. To be filled in spirit means to be permeated within with the Spirit of the One who knew HOW to deny Himself, go through death, and come out in resurrection.The husbands, in order to love their wives so as to LAY DOWN THEIR LIVES for them, cannot do so apart from being filled in spirit .The wives, to be submissive to their husbands, also need to be filled in spirit with the most subject One Christ. Both husbands and wives require the saturation with the Spirit of the same Jesus.Some have tried to love their wives as Christ loved the church. Without being filled in spirit it is hard. It may last some of the morning. The same is true of wives living with husbands, Christian children to parents, Christian slaves to masters, Christian masters towards slaves.Please remember that Ephesians 5 is instructions to the regenerated churching people who have the Spirit of Christ. These are not general instructions for the world to make it a "better place."Now, granted, if I were a Christian sister, I also probably would not like the verse saying "For a husband is head of the wife as also Christ is head of the church, ..." (v.23) . How ever the next part, as Richh suggested, may not be too bad (from the woman's point of view ) - "He Himself is the Savior of the Body ... Husbands, love your wives even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her." (v.25) I've been married about 36 years. Quite a few times I found it hard to give up myself for my beloved wife as Christ did for the church. However, being "filled in spirit" has tremendously helped us. For only Christ is absolute for the will of God.Incidently, the Apostle Paul speaks of the church as the "one new man". And in this "one new man" old patterns of social oppression are to be nullified. Male oppression of female is nullified as well as master oppression of slave. This is seen in Galatians - "For as many as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There cannot be Jew and Greek, there cannot be slave nor free man, there cannot be male and female; for you are all one in Christ" (Galatians 3:27,28) Now this is not a magnanimus instruction. This is not a liberal minded word saying "You SHOULD NOT act that way." This is a command that "there CANNOT BE". If you want the rich reality of the church life there CANNOT BE and there is no possibility that there can be oppression of Greek upon Jew, or oppression of slave under free man, or oppression of female under male. For the Christian church to be healthy and normal there cannot be old practices of social oppression as occur in the fallen Godless culture.In this kingdom there cannot be the oppressive patterns of stratification involving one group oppressing another.This may explain why, when the NT mentions the couple in whose home the church in Ephesus met, it sometimes mention the wife's name first - Prisca and Acquilla. It is not alway the husband first and then the wife - Acquilla and Prisca as we might expect.I will have to continue latter. But the important thing in this post to me is that being FILLED in spirit with the resurrected Christ is the key to the harmonious relationships needed in verses 5:22 - 6:9.All has not been discussed by any means.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Who wrote Ephesians:

​

Much like Colossians, and for the same reasons, the authorship of Ephesians is controversial. While Paul is the most likely author, many scholars have a difficult time explaining the unique writing style, tone, and message of Ephesians and Colossians. Generally the letters of Paul address specific areas of concern; inconsistent with the generalities of Ephesians and Colossians. The depth of the theology found in Ephesians and Colossians is inconsistent with the theology found within the letters of Paul. Even the language and linguistic style of Ephesians and Colossians differs slightly from the known letters of Paul.

​

However, when one considers the condition and circumstances of Paul at the time he would have authored Ephesians and Colossians, the change in tone and message makes sense. Many scholars believe Paul wrote Ephesians and Colossians while in prison. In the case of Ephesians, Paul would have written the letter while imprisoned in either Caesarea Maritima in the late 50s or Rome in the early 60s. Paul’s imprisonment and the likelihood he would be executed probably encouraged him to reflect deeply upon his ministry, the new church, and the nature of Christ. [jaywill's emphasis]

​

The conclusion of Colossians resembles the conclusion of Ephesians. Leading nearly all scholars to agree the author of Ephesians was also the author of Colossians, whether it was Paul or not:

​

Tychicus will tell you all the news about me. He is a dear brother, a faithful minister and fellow servant in the Lord. I am send him to you for the express purpose that you may know about our circumstances and that he may encourage you hearts.

​

Colossians 4: 7-8

​

Tychicus, the dear brother and faithful servant in the Lord, will tell you everything, so that you also may know how I am and what I am doing.

​

Ephesians 6: 21

​

The author of Ephesians, if not Paul, attempted to impersonate Paul. The difficulty in impersonating someone as well known and respected as Paul makes an anonymous author doubtful. The intelligence required to pass Ephesians as a letter of Paul is certainly not reflected in the alleged anonymous author’s ability to impersonate Paul’s writing style.

​

Aside from the change in tone and message, we have no good reason to believe anyone other than Paul wrote Ephesians. Most likely, Ephesians is the reflections of a man certain his life was over.

---

Copied without permission from: "New Apologia" athttp://newapologia.com/who-wrote-ephesians/ The comment you wrote about the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Christ the chief cornerstone in Ephesians verses Christ as the foundation in First Corinthians, is interesting.I don't think the variation should alarm anyone that Paul is not the writer of Ephesians.Paul says in First Corinthians that he laid the one foundation for the church in Corinth.
Paul was an apostle.
Paul was not the only apostle of course.
Other apostles and prophets laid the unique foundation for other churches.Therefore the foundation OF the apostles and prophets means the apostles' and prophets' revelation of Christ was the foundation of the churches and of the church universal.As Paul could speak of "my gospel" in an effectionate way - (Romans 2:16) he might also speak of "his foundation." Or "the foundation of the apostles and prophets" - the revelation of Christ.Christ is so much to the church He, of course, can be the foundation and the cornerstone too. He fills all and all.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

The New Testament teaches the highest morality on earth.You cannot get any higher morality then denying yourself, dying to self and allowing the Spirit of Jesus Christ to transform your soul. For this reason many, men and women, shudder at the high demand of Christ's words - "For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall by no means enter into the kingdom of the heavens." (Matt. 5:20)

​

You therefore shall be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matt. 5:48) We may think today of the scribes and Pharisees as villians of the NT. Actually Christ was talking about the people who were highly regarded as being the most moral, upstanding, straight, and ethical.
That is one reason they hated Jesus so much. He exposed their hypocrisy and then told the crowd that entering into the kingdom of God required much more genuine reality.Verses like Matt. 5:20 and 5:48 are just a small sample Jesus teaching in Matthew. The morality taught by Christ in Matthew is really a discription of Jesus Christ of Himself. And without Christ coming into us and transforming us we cannot qualify for the millennial kingdom which occupies this earth immediately following His second coming.To repeat myself again - Paul begins his practical instructions for the disciples to be filled in spirit. Now he says "dissolution" from wine or drunkeness is the goal but overflowing joy in the Holy Spirit.You know people drink wine to dull their senses. People drink wine to make their problems in their souls go away. Paul's seems to realize the the process of being transformed in personality for the building of the church will sometimes ache. Afterall, both husbands and wives, both employer and employee, both master and slave, have to deny themselves, pick up their cross and follow the Lord Jesus - "Then Jesus said to His disciples, If anyuone wants to come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. For whoever wants to save his soul-life shall lose it; but whoever loses his soul-life for My sake shall find it." (Matt. 16:25,26) The Christian must enjoy Christ. She must enjoy Christ to the point that she can lay down her soul life and live a supernatural life blended with the resurrected Christ. The same is true of every Christian in whatever walk of life they find themselves when they begin to follow Jesus.To achieve this highest level of morality on the earth requires that we receive Christ and allow Him to fill us from our spirit into our soul and personality. It is the same challenge to everyone. There is no shortcut to anyone. The gladiator, the master, the tax collector, the prostitute, the thief -- all may find they want to turn their lives over to Christ.History says so. And fiction exploits the theme - Ben Hur, The Robe, Chariots of Fire and other stories tried to capture this dilimma. A person becomes a Christ lover in any and all kinds of life endeavors.You should not take that fact that Paul realized people from many environments were responding to the preaching of Christ to mean God or Paul was necessarily endorsing those social systems per se.I read it as "Christ, in this situation, can prevail and save also." He looks to the second coming of Christ for the establishment of the kingdom of God on the globe. That is the age of the millennial kingdom and the following new heaven and new earth.In the church age, as an apostle, he establishes these "counter testimonies" if you will. That is the called out ones. That is the EKKLESIA as a kind of counter culture testament of the power of Christ's salvation to liberate, establish a just and righteous "city on a hill" . These communities are the churches. They are the local expression of the universal church.They are undergoing the process of growing Christ within people. That is they are like farms cultivating and growing God within people - "For we [apostles] are God's fellow workers; you are God's cultivated land [or farm], God's building Please notice here in 1 Corithians as well as in Ephesians, the linkage between Divine Growing and Divine Building. For the God to GROW in the Christians is for God to BUILD them up into His building. The building goes up and together as Christ is grown in the disciples, encreasing in them, transforming them, uniting them together in divine love. "You are God's farm, God's building" . And I say for the building of God's house there must be the transformation from denying the old adamic self and enjoying the fullness of Christ.The unbeliever denies himself and has NOTHING left over. The believer has an unsearchably rich Son of God living in him. When she denies herself she is not left with nothing. She is left with an unsearchably rich Person - a Godman. That isolate passages of the Bible have been exploited, I cannot possibly deny. You won that argument.Some of us hear Christ's call to overcome the surrounding degradation. It is not as if He gave the disciples no heads up. He taught us that the tares and the wheat would grow together in the world until the angels separated them at the end of the age.If you say "There are tares out there in the world." I can only respond - "Yes, the Lord warned us." But you and I do not have to be like that. As a Christian I have always asked God to lead me to Christians who would help my faith rather than discourage my faith. He has been faithful in doing that.We can get deeper into the matter of authority and submission perhaps latter. But the Bible steps on somebody's toes somewhere. There is always a verse in the Bible that someone wishes were not there.If I were a Old Testament reader and a modern day slave holder in the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade, I would hate to hear the kidnapping people was crime to the Israelites punishable by death. I also would hate to hear that runaway slaves were not to be returned to their masters.As a New Testament reader, and a slave holder, Trans Atlantic Slave Trade style I would hate several passages in the New Testament too. The entire book of Philemon I would wish was not in the Bible.So let's try to take in a balanced "holistic" view, so to speak.
Isn't it the case that everyone should be subject to one another in the Christian church in humility - " ... and all of you gird yourselves with humility toward one another, because God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble." (1 Peter. 5:5) Much instruction in Ephesians and Colossians also has this tone of mutual humility. Me and my Christian wife have been married for about 36 years. If I did not submit to her many times we would not now be together. And many a time her fellowship and wisdom saved me from serious errors.Also if I did not learn to lay down my life sometimes for the sake of my wife and children, as Christ laid down His life for the church, we could not have such a blessed family life.Lastly, Women's Suffrage movements were largly fueled by Christian's deriving their social activism from the Bible. This is especially in the basics of all men and women being equally created in the image of God.And one of the oldest examples of an ancient man expressing concern for justice for his servants comes from the Bible's oldest book Job. "If I have despised the cause of my servant por my maid when they contended with me, what then will I do when God rises up?

​

And when He who visits me, what will I answer Him? Did not He who made me in the womb make him?

​

And was it not One who fashioned us in the womb?" (Job 31:13-15) This was written about 500 years before Moses wrote the Pentateuch. That is around 2000 BC.Can you show us another example of ancient writing around this time expressing fear before God about mistreating one's male or female servants ? Can you find another ancient writing so succintly expressing the thought that slave and master are both equal as being humans created by God ?Consider these things too. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I agree. However, don't we have to take the emotionally charged word SLAVE and ascertain exactly what is being talked about?Indentured servitude is an old institution in which people sold themselves into employment to pay off a debt. It was not ideal. It was not always a picnic. And indentured servitude in American history could be a hell.Now kidnapping to make slaves, both the Old and New Testament condemn. Kidnapping is one of the acts of lawlessnes which Paul condemns -

"And know this, that the law is not enacted for a righteous man but for the lawless and unruly, for ungodly and sinners,

​

for the unholy and profane,
for those who strike their fathers and those who strike their mothers,
for murderers,
for fornicators,
for homosexuals,
KIDNAPPERS,
liars,
perjurers,
and whatever other thing that is opposed to healthy teaching according to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, with which I was entrusted." (1 Timothy 1:9-11 my emphasis) Wouldn't you agree that the Apostle Paul counts "kidnapping" with many other offensive evils as opposed to the healthy teaching of the Gospel entrusted to Paul ?Paul probably had in his mind the death penalty commanded against kidnappers in the theocratic Old Testament Israel.

quote:

---

"He who kidnaps a man, whether he sells him or he is found in his possession, shall surely be put to death." (Exo. 21:16)

​

"If a man is caught kidnapping any of his countrymen of the sons of Israel, and he deals with him violently or sells him, then the thief shall die, so you shall purge the evil from among you." (Deut. 24:7)

---

The prohibition NT (1 Tim. 1:10) and OT (Exo. 21:16) on kidnapping is ignored or a lost point any many readers. The English word "slave" in envokes in me the repulsive antebellum Sourthern Slavery that my African ancestors endured.When I read "servant" or "slave" in the Bible it is important for me not to be governed by a knee-jerk reaction but to ascertain what is being talked about.The 21rst Century man may be very proud that slavery has been largely eradicated in modern cultures, due of course to a large degree on Abolitionists likes the Quakers, the Mennonites, and the Methodists. And some may see the word slave in the New Testament used in such a way as to give the appearance of God's tolerance or endorcement of the evil antibellum kidnapping and slavery most familiar to the modern mind.I think the passages that Richh refered to were enough to get a fuller picture of Paul's word to those found in the slavery of the Roman Empire who became brothers in Christ. In the New Testament God is taking men and women and endowing them with the divine nature - " ... He has granted to us precious and exceedingly great promises that through these you might become partakers of the divine nature ..." ( 2 Peter 1:4a) In a very real special sense God is making followers of Christ God in life and nature but not in His Godhead. "Partakers of the divine nature" is a very very high calling. I think it exceeds any honor that the world can bestow.So we preach that God is more than taking the oppressed women to be liberated. He is taking them to be partakers of the divine nature - to be God in life and nature in His communicable attributes.That is not simply "admires" of the divine nature.
That is not merely "observers" of the divine nature.
That is not only "spectators" of the divine nature.
That is PARTAKERS of this divine nature.
That is PARTICIPANTS in God's nature.This is beyond only being rescued or liberated by God. This is being a partaker of God as a son of God. This is very high and honorable. And it is wrought into man from the inside out.The in working process begins as soon as one receives Christ. And at that time the person may be in any manner of worldly societal situation, including the legalized Roman slavery.I think what you underestimate is the radical nature of Christ's salvation. I mean radical in the sense of going to the root of man's problem.I am a black man. My ancestors were African slaves. I think I know something about the evils of slavery. Yet I have known many freed black men and women who are still slaves within. They need a deeper freeing along with a outward institutional liberation.I'm for both. But for a space of history I am glad that God demonstrated that Christ could empower and uphold people in such an evil system. He would not be much of Savior if He could not empower the gladiator in his bondage, or the slave in his bondage, or the soldier in his kind of bondage. His life had to be demonstrated as all fitting and able to flourish in any kind of negative environment.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Philemon is really a continuation of Colossians. Paul's vision of "the new man" is a new humanity where "there cannot be slave, freeman" - "And having put on the new man, which is being renewed unto full knowledge according to the image of Him Who created him; where there cannot be Greek and Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barabarian, Scythian, slave, freeman, but Christ is all and in all." (Col. 3:10,11) In Colossians 4 we see the fellowship within this new man. A slave and a freeman (in the eyes of the world in which it was legal to own a bondservant) are in the Christian church of equal status.Verse 9 speaks of Onesimus who we see in the book of Philemon was the runaway slave. But in reading Colossians you do not detect that -

Colossians 4:9 - " ... Onesimus, the faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you." This means that Onesimus is one of the Christian brothers in the church in Colossi. Paul did not refer to Onesimus as "Philemon's slave" but as a faithful and beloved brother.Also mentioned in Colossians for is the physical child of Philemon, Archippus -

4:17 - "And say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry which you have recieved in the Lord, that you fulfill it." How do I know Archippus is a son of Philemon the slave master of Onesimus? I strongly suspect so because Archippus is mentioned as belonging to the household of Philemon - Philemon 1,2 - "Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy the brother, to Philemon our beloved and fellow worker and to Apphia the sister and to Archippus our fellow soldier and to the church, which is in your house ..."
Archippus in Easton's Bible Dictionary master of the horse, a "fellow-soldier" of Paul's (Philemon 1:2), whom he exhorts to renewed activity (Col. 4:17). He was a member of Philemon's family, probably his son.
Archippus - Bible HistorySo we see that the son of Philemon, Archippus, Onesimus the runaway slave of the legalized slavery and Philemon were of equal status in the "new man" - the Christian church-============================
Compare:Slave master -
"Philemon our beloved brother and fellow worker" (Philemon 1:1) Runaway slave -

"Onesimus, the faithful and beloved brother, who is one of you ..."( Col. 4:9) Physical son of slave master -

"Archippus our fellow soldier" (Col. 1:2) W also could mention Aphia the sister (Philemon 2)
=======================================
The social rank is put aside. Paul pointedly emphasizes that Philemon is now above a slave, but a beloved brother. Furthermore Philemon is as much an associate co-worker with the apostle as his other fellow workers.Philemon is a book which especially shows us the equality in eternal life and divine love of all the members in the Body of Christ. The distinction of social rank and status among the believers is nullified not by an outward legal act, but by an inward changed of constitution. Ranks have been abolished because the believers have been constituted of Christ's Spirit and His life.In the legalized master / bondservant custom of ancient Rome Philemon was a master and was free, and Onesimus was a slave and was not free. But according to the inner constitution, both were the same. The divine birth makes all believers in Christ in that age and in any age of world history of equal status in the "one new man" with no discrimination between free and bond.

As I said, my own ancestors were black African slaves. So as a black man and a Christian you can believe that I have wrestled with these issues.I well could have thrown my lot in with Elijah Mohammed or Louis Farrakan years ago and become a member of the Nation of Islam (ie. Black Moslems ). Don't think no attempt to recruit me was not made many times.I could dismiss the Christian Gospel in total as "the white man's religion" (right or wrong) and become a militant Black Supremacist of some type.I only repeat this to assure you that the issue does touch me personally.Now, since I decided the follow Jesus and His Gospel and His apostles in the "great commission" (as you suggest) I have to more nuanced and careful examination of the issues.It seems to me that you are saying that What Paul the Apostle SHOULD have filled his epistles with is, for example -Instructions to Roman gladiators how to escape custody and ferment insurrections.Instructions to bondervants on escape or assasination of their masters (that is legal ones in the eyes of the Roman government).Plans for the churches to gather for public protests in Rome and Athens.Explicit recommendations for all married women to take their husbands to court.Recommendations for the rich women patrons of Paul's ministry to immediatly dump their husbands.Instructions for soldiers, guards and members of the military to marshal their forces for armed revolution against their generals, masters, employers, authorities.Is this the New Testament epistles by Paul which you think would be more an expression of the teaching of Jesus ? That is a full fledged activist zealot? Do you imagine his letters should read little more like a bullitin to the members of the Westfield Baptist Church only with a militant socially progressive agenda?I think if this is the case then I wonder why Jesus didn't just dismiss most of the disciples and retain the ones from the Zealots.What I see is not a militant social reformer on behalf of slaves, gladiators, soldiers, women, prisoners. What I see is a man presenting a resurrected Lord and Savior who, in ANY social situation, in ANY social circumstance, in ANY political system, is able to empower from within, apart from legal decree, the ability to overcome.I do not see a preacher endorsing the current social customs. I see an apostle equiping the believer to know that there is no troublesome environment that can put the Christ within them down. They are "more than conquerors" through Him.Laws will change. Governments will change. What is legal or unlegal with the world's governments will change. Whatever the change, Christ is prevailing in the believers.I see Paul living himself by, and teaching of an all-fitting Christ who can cause the believers to be victorious no matter what the social order of the day is. Paul was in a Roman prison when he wrote some of these letters. His wisdom and words have been a sustaining encouragement to millions down through the ages.On one hand we wish he had not been locked up. Perhaps he could have written more and accomplished more. Part of the reason his teaching is so effective is because he did not instruct anyone to do what he himself was not doing.He lived by and in Christ in that hellish situation that God permitted him to be in.I prefer that my ancestors had not been slaves on Southern plantations. But I know they were also sustained by Philippians, by Ephesians, by the Acts of the Apostles.We certainly need a God of the free man. But we also needed a God of the enslaved man as well. Concerning any and all situations a man may receive the message of the great commission Paul wrote - "But in all these things we more than conquer through Him who loved us.

​

For I am persuaded that neither death nor life nor angels not principalities nor things present nor things to come nor powers nor height nor depth nor any other creature will be able to serparate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom. 8:37-38) You speak of "the great commission." But the result of the great commission is the testimony of the great endurance of the church to withstand every imaginable kind of attack, from within and from without.Every kind of social order, political system, custom of the day legal or illegal, even supernatural attack (" nor angels ") ... that nothing can quench the faith and destroy the Gospel has been manifested through the centries.So from a Roman prison, chained to probably to two guards, the apostle wrote us "According to my earnest expectation and hope that in nothing I will be put to shame, but with all boldness, as always, even now Christ will be magnified in my body, whether through life or through death.

​

For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain." (Phil. 1:20,21) I am glad the apostle wrote this word for the slave to hear, for the wife to hear, for the gladiator to hear, for the prisoner to hear, for the tax collector to hear, and every person who responds to the great commission to hear.I am glad Paul did not write from prison "Oh, you are a married woman under the customary authority of your husband? Sorry. Forget about being a Christian. But let me know if you ever get free from that situation and I'll teach you about the Son of God then." Very interesting point. That is because Ananias and Saphira did what they did to LOOK GOOD to the congregation. You might even say they wished to look "politically correct."God was not concerned for the show of a facade. He wanted real freedom from riches and real trust in Christ. They pretended.Likewise, it is not a show of social equity that Christ wants but a deep freedom in reality.Once a art teacher made an assignment to his art students. She asked them to paint a picture and call it "Peace."One student painted a nice sunset over the forest.
Another student painted sunrise over a quiet meadow.
Another student painted cloudless day over a still sea.But one student painted a thunderous waterfall with torrents of water tumbling over rocks in what appeared as a deafening roar. And in front of the waterfall was a little branch of a tree with a little bird asleep upon it.This was titled "Peace."This is an important aspect of Christ's great commission. In the world we will have tribulation. But we should fear not because He has overcome the world. Any problem that you claim to have with your darling whipping boy Paul, can be easily noticed to be a problem actually with God and Christ.We know Paul is the darling target of the modernist. But Paul's words in his letters can only be traced back in concept, for the most part, to something Jesus the Son of God already said.Now, I don't know about tangents, but it does kill me to have to come down from the loftier aspects of the Ephesian epistle to spend a lot of energy on this offensive to many, single passage from chapter 5. But something should be said.Now you tell me. In your revized Ephesian epistle, when you take a pair of scissors to the passage about wives submitting to their OWN husbands, are you also going to cut away the instructions to the husbands ?So we Christian males may also throw off the exhortation to love our wives laying down our lives for them as Christ did for the church ? Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Jazzn, Paul is encouraging them to death with and resurrection with Christ.They are made alive with Christ (1:5).
They are raised up together with Christ (1:6).
They are seated above with Christ (1:6).
What comes out in resurrection can never be destroyed.What is united with Christ in "organic" union of life cannot be oppressed, suppressed or depressed.The reason that the saying went out that "The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the saints" because they noticed that the more they were persecuted the more the truth of the risen Lord and Savior prevailed and spread.You spoke of the great commission. You should realize that to baptize people into the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is not there a ritualistic formula simply to pronounce. To baptize into the name of the Triune God is to immerse men in the Triune God. Utter identification and union of people with the Triune God. This is the great commission.The uprising is oneness with a Jesus within them who cannot be put down.Do you recall the story of Moses how he killed the Egyptian and buried him in the sand.Now that was revolutionary. It wasn't appreciated much by his fellow Hebrews.He ended up running away and giving up his life's dream of being the Jewish liberator.Then God worked on him and equiped him to lead the Israelites in the Exodus.Man needs to take God's way for God's purpose and God's kingdom. Well, I really thing this Original Paul and Latter Fake Paul is purely of your imagination.I think you and others have sought to concoct "Another" Paul so that you, perhaps, may selectively shop through the New Testament for ideas you want choose or discard. This is a rationale for nourishing pre-conceived biases.I will try to demonstrate below that Paul was faithful to Jesus Christ and actually pioneered for us the Christian life. It is not insignificant that Paul instructs the slave masters of the church in Colossi - "Masters, grant to your slaves that which is just and equal, knowing that you also have a Master in heaven." (4:1) Since there cannot be slave and free man in the "one new man" the apostle instills the fear of God into the masters of that then legal system.I do not see Paul demanding the Philemon free all his slaves. But I do see Paul telling Philemon that his slave is just as much a fellow worker and beloved brothers as any believer in his church or household, including his physical son. I see Paul telling Philemon to receive Onesimus as if he were Paul and Paul's heart. I see Paul reminding Philemon that he should do so because he owes his own life to Paul's preaching. And I see Paul demanding that any loss due to Onesimus be charged to Paul.Finally I see Paul saying that he knows that Philemon will not just do what Paul asks but will go beyond what he asks.In this way I see the apostle heaping coals of fire upon the conscience of the slave master which virtually amounts to the slave master having to free the slave. Yet the slave WAS afterall a member of the church in Colossi which met in the house of Philemon. So I do not see Paul instructing Philemon to get off to another city. Reconcilation in the Body of Christ is what I see and should see.If Paul was interested in defending the kidnapping for slavery he would not have recalled that like murder, kidnapping was a transgression against the law of Moses.Anyway, the apostle's priorities is nullifying social oppression and reconciling all equal members of the "one new man" where there cannot be slave and free man.You know the northern Mennites and Quakers did mightily protest against the slave trade. But a good deal of them still would not like to have a black African living in their own neighberhood. They certainly were still afraid of intermarriage and intergration with the former slaves. I think the genuine liberation in Christ of the Gospel penetrates deeper than liberal social reform. For in the Body of Christ it is "Christ is all and in all."Of course they didn't HAVE to own slaves.In the spread of the great commission, which you seemed concerned for, men and women would come to believe in the Son of God, finding themselves in all kinds of situations.How should the apostles help them to grow in Christ?We do see Paul advizing slave to gain their freedom if they can.But what if they cannot?They should not abandon living in Christ the Lord for that reason. Rather they should use that to which they are obligated to as opportunity to testify of the life power of Christ. This was not something Paul himself was not living as he could not always be free from a Roman jailhouse. " You were bought with a price; do not be slaves of men. Each one, brothers, in what [status] he was called, in this let him remain with God." The words "remain with God" are key. It is not to remain without the God of resurrection. It is to remain but with the God who demonstrated His overcoming and victorious life in the resurrection of Christ.Many times a person comes to Christ and as to his circumstances must "remain with God".Indentured servants could not walk away because they are now Christians.As for antebellum slavery of the American South, it has been overturned.I believe that it was overturned by the soveriegnty of God so that He could bring about the "one new man" of the Body of Christ in practice. To the Christian master, Paul's word was to give to the slave what was just and equal.This required them to live Christ as it required the servant to remain there with God.I think to the unbelieving master, Paul's hope was that he would be won over to the gospel.This was like the unbelieving spouse being won over if possible by the believing spouse. "For how do you know, O wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, O husband, whether you will save your wife?" (1 Cor. 7:16) I don't see any kind of encouragement to "wallow" in anything. I see Paul teaching the believers to be saturated and permeated with the living Lord Jesus in situations which they cannot be free from. The more the live Christ the more the habitation of in spirit is built up. All forms of human government are temporary until Christ's establishment of His kingdom on the whole earth. But He cannot and will not do this without a sizable group of those who have learned to be co-kings with him in his divine life. He taught them to live Christ, be filled with Christ, be permeated and saturated with the living and available Spirit of Jesus Christ.The Good News is all about Jesus being alive and available. And in the seventh chapter of First Corinthians each kind of person is being encouraged to live in the sphere and realm of Christ. Christ is God incarnate. So Paul's word for them is to "remain with God" .It is essentially the same in Ephesians. Each one is first instructed to be filled in spirit. And Paul prays that they would be strengthened into that realm of their inner man that Christ would make His home in their hearts through faith.Circumstances drive us believers to faith in Christ. Then Christ makes His home in our mind, emotion, will, and conscience. It is not the acting as much as the REACTING. Spontaneously we believers learn to REACT out of the indwelling Jesus Christ because He has made His home in our hearts. And He is ever strengthening His jurisdiction over our souls. "That He would grant you ... to be strengthened with power through His Spirit into the inner man, that Christ may make His home in your hearts through faith,that you, being rooted and grounded in love, May be full of strength to apprehend with all the saints whatr the breadth and length and height and depth are ..." (See Eph. 3:16-19) Here Christ is discribed as the limitless dimensions of the universe. He is of infinite capacity. He is the height. He is the depth. He is the length and the breadth. We cannot find the end of Him. Whatever situation we are in He can contain that and empower us. So He must strengthen us into the realm of His indwelling and make His home in our hearts. From His home in the heart He has His authority over the soul. We can overcome because He has been made Lord and we are subject to Him. Then all that He is is a supply to us.More than how the Christian acts it is how he reacts with spontaneity.But the acting and the reacting do also work together like a wheel within a wheel. I consider ALL that he told them. And the concept of TWO Pauls, I think, is a great error.But with a little internet talk some of these things cannot be solved easily.When I first became a disciple of Jesus in the early 70s, I could hardly stand to read Romans chapter 13 about human government.Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) was big on the college campus in my town. You are imagining a Paul you like and a another person saying he's Paul that you do not like. I see this only as a rationale to justify your selectivity, your bias. I can find just about all of Ephesians in the book of Romans. And there is so much of Ephesians in First and Second Corinthians. Probably it is because we live in the church life. We eat and breath these writings. It is not an academic matter of rocking chair theology for many of us. I have some problems with Jesus. MYSELF. But I also realize that I am crucified with Jesus, buried with Jesus and raised up with Jesus to walk in newness of life. To follow Jesus I have to deny myself and pick up my cross and follow Jesus. I would rather follow jaywill. But I find it a far greater joy to follow Jesus. And what is in Jesus cannot be hurt or destroyed.Paul was one Christian brother who pioneered into the deep Christian life. He wrote to help others to come foward into this life as he had done. There is no fake Paul in the New Testament. I think it would be more honest just to admit that some of what he writes you can take and some you just cannot at this time.But to say "The Paul I like is the only real Paul" is self deception. Actually we are mentioning the name Paul too much. I regard it as the word of God. Paul, an apostle (not from men nor through men but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead." (Gal. 1:1)

​

" ... we also thank God unceasingly that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but even as it truly is, the word of God, which operates in you who believe." (1 Thess. 2:13) Fortunately, Paul does tell us when he is speaking his opinion apart from a specific command of the God. In the Corinthian letters Paul is careful that we know when he speaks his opinion and when he instructs from God's command. At the moment I agree that an instruction to wives I cannot find in the four Gospels. However much of your complaint is seen in this passage - Luke 12:13-15 - "And someone out of the crowd said to Him, Teacher, tell my brother to divide the inheritance with me. But He said to him, Man, who appointed Me a judge and divider over you? And He said to them, Watch and guard yourself from all covetousness, for no one's life is in the abundance of his possessions?" It may be hard for some to realize this speaking comes from the same mouth as the one who said the meek shall inherit the earth. No doubt Christ said many things about giving to those in need. But here someone tries to hijack Jesus into being a social reformer to arbitrate a money matter. Apparently the man had no thought for the will of God or the kingdom of God. He only heard in Jesus' teaching a chance to even things out for his self centered earthly gain and materalism.Jesus, says no one appointed Him to be his private attorney to handle his lawsuit. Our grumblings about social justice can often take on the flavor like this. That is no concern for the kingdom of God whatsoever.Jesus said seek FIRST the kingdom and His righteousness.
That goes to the root of man's problem rather just putting on a bandaid. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't see any incongruence of any significance. Are you now using the word "inspired" in the sense of, for example, an "inspired" poem, an "inspired" piece of music, an "inspired" lecture on philosophy ? Or are you using "inspired" as the evangelical Christian would regard the "inspiration" of Scripture ?This would really be another discussion on how I as a Christian think of the "inspired" Scripture, or the epistles written under the inspiration of God. I would regard this a calling for another discussion and possibly another Room on the Forum. I don't think you are appreciating how much Ephesians Five and Christ's words do concur.I mentioned that we should not over look Paul's exhortation that the living Christ make His home in the believers hearts thorugh faith. This is Paul's starting point in gospel preaching and church building. And this is also the starting point of Jesus in John 14 - " ... If anyone lovs Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him" (John 14:23) This is a teaching of Christ being alive and available. This is a supernatural possibity for Jesus to blend the life of He and His Father with the life of the believer and lover.Paul echoes exactly the same teaching - "That He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit into the inner man, that Christ may make His home in your hearts through faith ..." (Eph. 3:16,17) Your political starting point may be social reform. Christ's starting point is to allow Himself and His Father to enter into the believer to make an abode with him.Your social starting point may be for the enactment of laws requiring masters to free slaves and wives to resist cooperating with thier husbands. Paul's starting point is the by faith Christ would make His home in the hearts of the believers. His exhortation is that they be energized and strenthened to live in that sphere of Jesus Christ mingling Himself with their inner being.The exhortations of chapter five are preceeded with the command to be filled in spirit. Many take these words for granted. Many feel Christ can only "come into your heart" in some sentimental way. But some of us take this exhortation to be filled in spirit as crucial to all that is associated with actions to follow.To be filled in spirit is verses being filled up with SELF. To be filled in spirit is verses Self Pity, Self Centered, Selfish, and preoccpation with the question "How will this effect ME?" It is to actually blend with this One who cannot be oppressed, depressed, supressed by anything the world can throw at it.The starting point of Christ and His apostles is to be filled with the available victorious Jesus who has become in a form in which He can mingle with man - "The last Adam [Christ] became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) . Where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom - "And the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is freedom." (2 Cor. 3:17) The foundation of the kingdom Christ builds and His apostles further is for God to dispense the living Christ into man as the "life giving Spirit" to GIVE God and GIVE the victorious Christ to man for subjective enjoyment.I don't think you show signs of caring for any of this. You're looking for requiring no contact with the indwelling Christ, no enjoyment of the living God, and primarily in the realm of social work or politics.Jesus told His disciples that apart from Him they could do NOTHING - "Abide in Me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.

​

I am the vine; you are the branches. He who abides in Me and I in him, he bears much fruit; for apart from Me you can do nothing." (John 15:4,5) The natural mind may protest. "Jesus, without You we can do a lot. We can enact social programs. We can pass new laws. All these things we can do without abiding in You."Yes we may do a lot of things apart abiding in Christ and Christ abiding in us. In terms of God's eternal purpose it will all amount to NOTHING. For the building materiar of the eternal kingdom is Christ dispensed and wrought into man's being. Apart from a union with Him all that we do do will amount eventually to nothing for His kingdom.The exhortations of Ephesian five are only samples. They are not exhaustive by any means. Paul could not possibly include an infinite number of circumstances to cover. He selects some as representative. But the overreaching exhortation is to have the available Christ so fill up the men and women that He is expressed in their circumstances whatever they may be, as cultures and government laws evolve and change through the ages. I have no problem regarding Ephesians as the early brothers in Christ, nearly 2,000 years closer to the man's life regarded it. That is as a genuine epistle from the Apostle Paul.Your exhortation sound to me like "If the Holocaust did not happen, then you really should take it to heart." Of course I should. But I strongly persuaded that the Holocaust did happen and the conspiracy theorists and Holocaust Deniers are self deceived. I am not a Catholic. Neither really am I a Protestant. And you are going to find me gravitating back to the contents of the book of Ephesians rather than extending too much more time to textural critical arguments of the authorship of this book. Interest, it may be to discuss. But I am assuming Pauline authorship. You are welcomed to have a different opinion on that. I do not believe in any kind of automatic apostolic succession. It is one thing to be cautious of man made traditions too heavily instituted. It is another thing to be hoodwinked by some Johnny Come Latelys who raise an issue in the 19th centure AD which was largly settled over 1,000 some years ago.Our God (as Christians) took great care to design the sting of a wasp and the machinary of a cell. Why would He be sloppy with directing His lovers to recognize apostolic writings under divine inspiration ? Your thesis suggests either that there is no God or that He is so incapable of forming on earth a book through the recognition and discovery of the authority of the Holy Spirit upon it.I do not expect that without exception any human being will like everything he or she reads in the Bible with no exception. My answer to troublesome portions of the Bible is not to rationalize that the prophet or apostle didn't say that.In the book of Jeremiah the remnant of Jews went to Jeremiah to get the word of God. But it was exposed that they didn't really want to subject themselves to God. So they accused Jeremiah of fabricating a message. "God didn't tell you to say THAT!" was their reaction. We have a similar problem here with Ephesians. There is "the Paul we like" verses "the Paul we don't like which is a fake Paul. He didn't write THAT."I know that fake letters did occur in early church history. This, however should not be an excuse to deem as "fake" what I have a problem with. I would be suspicious if a apostotic writing contained ONLY things which conformed to my views about life.When I encounter difficulties in the Bible (and I have had many) I put them on the back burner and endevour to continue growing spiritually. Often previous problems are resolved with greater spiritual maturity. I am not Catholic. Yet then again I am the true kind of Catholic in that every person in the world whom Christ has received I also must receive as my brother. So, no, I am not Roman Catholic. But in the true meaning of the word I am a member of the church universal. Let me put it this way - Freedom from the INSIDE OUT. I once read about David Henry Thoreau being put into jail. He said that he felt more free than his jailors did.We disciples of Jesus see His crucifixion as a great victory, a great triumph. We do not see His death on the cross as the execution of a defeated man. We see rather a victorious Godman within Whom Satan had nothing.And His resurrection is a further victory over death. It is that Person whom God desires to wrought into our being. God's purpose is to dispense this available Person into our being so as to mingle with us in a blended way.This mingling of the Son of God with our being is a true freedom working not from the outside but from the inside of man out.I am not saying this to undermine physical liberation. I am saying this in harmony with both Christ and His apostles that God's liberation works from the inside of man first.More importantly, Paul is building up the habitation of God in spirit, a living dwelling place where God dwells within man on this earth. You seem to care very little for this. Without a vision the people run wild. Chapter Five was not the first chapter in Ephesians. First Paul paints a grand picture of what all our experiences are for in Christ. The vision and the fact of being strengthened into the inner man where Christ has come to join Himself with the believer, and to be filled in spirit enable us to pass through the unavoidable tribulations of life on earth.We know that Christ will at the end smash all the world governments and the kingdom of the world will become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ (Rev. 11:15) . I know many African American descendents of slaves. I am really glad I and they are free from the institution of antebellum Slavery. Tragically, many are still in terrible bondage. So we continue to preach the Gospel which frees from the inside out. Yet it also makes us bondservants to Christ the Lord.Your priorities do not need God to be dispensed into man. God's priorities require the duplication of what Christ is - a man in union with the living God. And Christ's will was to reproduce others like Himself, (not to accomplish redemption) but to be men and women mingled with God in a life union. "Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless the grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it abides alone; but if it dies it bears much fruit." (John 12:24) Christ wants to germinate more human beings with the life of God in them. So He would not abide alone. He went to the cross to break the shell of His humanity and release the eternal and divine life within Him into forgiven sinners. He would duplicate men mingled with God.He follows this saying about His duplication with an exhortation to deny ourselves that we may find ourselves truly - " ... but if it dies, it bears much fruit. He who loves his soul-life loses it; and he who hates his soul-life in this world shall keep it unto eternal life." (v.25) No one who comes to Christ can forever postpone the mandate to deny himself, deny herself. No social status in life will exempt any Christian from having to deny himself. It is better to lose the fallen Adamic soul now and gain the God filled soul in the end. It is inferior to save the Adamic soul now only to lose the soul's enjoyment during Christ's kingdom and reign on the earth.It is obvious from Paul's letter to the slave master Philemon that both parties equally were called to deny the self and let Christ live in them. This was liberating. This was building up the "one new man". This was also something the world could not destroy. In Acts the churching people gave all that they owned. Not by an outward decree. And they were not to do so as a facade or show. If they were so capable of such faith they did so willingly. You should notice that it also says that they were all filled with the Holy Spirit.So then Paul's exhortation in Ephesians Five to be filled in spirit (with the Holy Spirit) is spot on consistent with what happened in Acts.At least in Philemon we see Paul encouraging the slave master that Paul knows that he will do beyond what Paul asks of him - "Having confidence in your obediance, I have written you, knowing that you will do even beyond the things that I say." (Philemon 21). This apostle was confident in the Christ who indwelled this slave master. His condence was in how Jesus would regulate the Christ lover from within. Withing the sphere of the Christian church Paul carried out this ministry. We do not see him directing this exhortation to the general public. And this seems to be what you think he sould have done.But Christ has no ground in the unbeliever. First the unbeliever must believe into Christ have Christ enter into his heart. And then to make His home more and more in his heart by faith. Yes. In the church life there is need for much shepherding, exhortation, teaching and being an example. There is much to do. Most important is doing it in oneness with the Lord Jesus. Paul ministered out of what he WAS. His person and his message were one. He ministered the Christ that he himself LIVED. It was powerful. And it is the norm.I did not say that it was the average. I said that it was the normal. Occasionally I may give a benefit of a doubt. You have unfurled the flag though pretty clearly. I left out the paragraph in which you nearly write blasphemous things about God.So when I see this kind of bias I suspect one is going though the Bible like a grocery store. That is to pick and choose what fits their disposition. There's a saying that has much truth I think - "What kind of person you are determines what kind of Bible you have." Your kind of New Testament has to accomodate for your need to say God is a sadistic dictator. I think you have been enfluenced by Richard Dawkins. I think you want to "salvage" something. But I think if you examine your so called "authentic Paul" that you like, you'll also come across passages that you'll have to decide someone else wrote.For length's sake I will stop here.