Search Results

Do you ever try to control God’s plans for your life instead of trusting him to do what is best? God had promised to make Abraham the father of a great nation. The only problem was that Abraham’s wife, Sarah, couldn’t have kids. In those days, infertility was thought to be the ultimate curse, and Sarah was running out of time. As she got older, Sarah became more and more desperate to provide a child for her husband, so one day she decided to take matters into her own hands. Imitating the cultural practices of the nations around her, Sarah gave her maid Hagar to her husband as a kind of substitute wife and surrogate mother. Abraham showed his desperation as well and went along with the plan instead of trusting God to do things his way. Sure enough, Hagar became pregnant. You can imagine the tension in the household at that point. Not surprisingly, Sarah grew jealous of Hagar despite the fact that the whole thing was Sarah’s idea in the first place. Sarah began to make Hagar’s life miserable, and Hagar responded by running away. Only an angel from God was able to convince her to return. Hagar gave birth to Ishmael, and Abraham finally had his heir. However, things got messy a little more than a decade later when Sarah herself finally became pregnant. When Sarah gave birth to Isaac, the tension between her and Hagar increased. Rather than taking steps to ease the tension, Sarah pressured Abraham to send Hagar and Ishmael away from their home. But even that didn’t quell the family feud — a feud that has continued to fester for thousands of years. This historical event is still a main point of contention today between the boys’ descendants, the Arabs (Ishmael) and the Israelites (Isaac). Lessons for Us Today This story is not a fairy tale; the domestic war that was waging between Hagar and Sarah really happened and has implications for your life as well. One of the biggest lessons here is understanding how different everything would have turned out had Abraham and Sarah simply trusted God without taking things into their own hands. God doesn’t need our help. Our job is to trust him to carry out his plan in his way, according to his timetable. Another lesson can be found in how Abraham responded. God made a promise to Abraham, and Abraham knew it; however, Abraham still went along with Sarah’s plans and did not speak up about the promise God had made. Rather than standing up for the truth, Abraham passively sat back and let his wife and her servant fight it out. Learn from Abraham’s mistake. Stand up for what you know is true. It’s normal to struggle with giving up control to God — people of all ages wrestle with this, as Abraham and Sarah show us. At the end of the story, though, God did exactly what he said he was going to do. Drawn from the NIV Revolution Bible .

1 Timothy 6:1–2 Let all who are under a yoke as bondservants regard their own masters as worthy of all honor, so that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled. 2 Those who have believing masters must not be disrespectful on the ground that they are brothers; rather they must serve all the better since those who benefit by their good service are believers and beloved.—1 Timothy 6:1–2a Regard Their Masters as Worthy of All Honor? Paul issues his command to “bondservants” who are “under a yoke” and have “masters.” The word translated “bondservants” is the Greek term doulos, the standard term for slaves used throughout the NT. These particular slaves are “under a yoke.” A literal yoke is a “frame used to control working animals” (BDAG, s.v. ζυγός). The word appears here and elsewhere to describe the condition of slaves in the Roman world. Such slaves were the property of their masters and were required to do whatever their masters told them to do. If they failed to do their master’s bidding, the master could use coercive violence to compel them to do the task at hand. In Roman slavery, a master had the power of life and death over his slave. The master could take his slave’s life if he so desired because his slave was his property to do with as he pleased. At first glance, Paul’s words may appear to be an endorsement of human slavery, but they are not. Elsewhere, he states that slaves should pursue their own freedom if at all possible, and he also forbids free Christians from becoming slaves (1 Cor. 7:21–23). In this way, Paul seems to suggest that slavery is a sinful institution to be avoided. But in 1 Timothy 6:1–2, Paul is not making a statement about systemic injustices and social inequality. Nor is he intending to offer a moral evaluation of the institution of slavery. Rather, he is instructing Christian slaves about how they are to follow Christ in the situation in which they find themselves. Faithfulness to Christ does not require slaves to mount an armed rebellion against their oppressors, nor does it require them to pursue a massive reformation of the institution of slavery. These kinds of opportunities were not available to slaves in the Greco-Roman world, and modern readers need to be careful not to read their own democratic expectations into the strictures of a first-century slave’s life. Paul seeks to spell out for the slaves in the congregation how they may remain faithful to Christ in a very difficult situation. Paul directs his command to slaves, those who are “under a yoke.” They must “honor” their masters. Commentators such as George Knight are correct to contend that “under a yoke” indicates an oppressive situation, one in which a slave is treated as little more than an ox with a yoke about his neck. Such language implies that Paul means to address slaves serving non-Christian masters in verse 1. These servants are to regard their masters as worthy of all honor. Paul does not say that such masters are worthy of all honor, only that the servant must treat this authority in his life as if he were. Thus Christians who find themselves with an unbelieving authority over them are to serve that authority with respect. They are not allowed to disrespect or mistreat the authorities in their lives merely because they do not like them or because the masters do not believe as Christians do. On the contrary, Christians must honor unbelieving authorities precisely because Christians seek to persuade those authorities to believe the gospel. This does not mean that a slave must obey everything that human authorities tell them to do. As Paul makes clear elsewhere, human authorities are not ultimate (Rom. 13:1–2)—only God is. If a human authority instructs a Christian to do what God forbids, or forbids a Christian from doing what God commands, the Christian must defy that authority, as Peter and the other apostles did when they said, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). But when it is possible to follow human authority without breaking God’s law, Christians are to do all they can to honor that person’s position, “so that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled.” The “name of God” is his reputation; the “teaching” is the gospel. These Christian slaves must not give any occasion for unbelievers to disrespect God or ignore his gospel. When a slave renders difficult obedience, he presents a powerful testimony that can serve as a compelling witness to his master. He images forth the very suffering that Christ himself underwent (1 Pet. 2:18–21). The Bible and Slavery Some people read this text and believe that because Paul tells slaves to honor their masters, he must be endorsing slavery. But is this view correct? The answer is no,for several reasons. 1. Telling someone to submit to an authority does not imply that the authority is morally approved. God told the Israelites to seek the good of the city while they lived under the authority of Babylon, as all the while God planned to destroy Babylon for its wickedness. Peter tells wives to submit to a husband’s authority, even those who “do not obey the word” (1 Pet. 3:1–2). He also instructs Christians to submit to governing authorities, even if those authorities are persecuting them (1 Peter 2). God condemns any exercise of authority that is contrary to his holy will. And there were many elements of both Roman slavery and American slavery that were against God’s law. Treating persons as property without recognizing their dignity as image-bearers of Almighty God is sinful and is condemned everywhere in the Bible. And yet that feature was endemic to both Roman and American slavery. So telling someone to submit to an authority cannot automatically be an endorsement of the one wielding that authority. 2. The Bible often condemns the means by which slaves were taken as slaves. In the first century, slavery was not race-based, as it was in the American South. People were taken as slaves through a number of means, including warfare, piracy, highway robbery, infant exposure, and punishment of criminals. In all of this, the issue of kidnapping persons in order to enslave them was always prevalent. What does the Bible say about kidnapping? In 1 Timothy 1:10, the apostle Paul says that kidnapping or manstealing is against God’s law. Most interpreters recognize that this manstealing was for the purpose of slavery. This is why the ESV translates the relevant term as “enslavers” (cf. ESV mg.). The background for Paul’s command is the OT law, which states, “Whoever steals a man and sells him, and anyone found in possession of him, shall be put to death” (Ex. 21:16). Who is to be put to death? The one who takes the man and the one who holds him. This is significant, for some have made the case that while the Bible does condemn slave trading, it does not condemn slave holding. If this view were correct, there would not necessarily have been any moral problem with Christians owning slaves in the American South before and during the Civil War. But Exodus 21:16 says that both the kidnapping and the enslavement are punishable by death. And this is the background for Paul’s own thinking about the matter in 1 Timothy. The entire system of Southern slavery was based on kidnapping persons from Africa. The slave-traders stuffed these Africans into ship holds, where they suffered and died by the thousands. That slave trade was an abomination. And it is fallacious to suggest that the slaveholders were not morally implicated in the slave trade. One cannot defend those who participated in the slave trade, nor can one defend those slave owners who created the market for manstealing. So the Bible definitely condemns the means by which slaves were taken as slaves—especially kidnapping, which was punishable by death. 3. The New Testament forbids Christians from using coercive violence against slaves. Ephesians 6:9 states, “Masters, do the same to them, and stop your threatening, knowing that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and that there is no partiality with him.” At the very least, this text confirms that there were Christian slave owners in NT times. Yet Paul says that the slave owners were not allowed to threaten their slaves with violence. And obviously, if they were not allowed to threaten with violence, they were not allowed to do violence against their slaves. It may have been permissible under Roman law for a master to abuse or even kill his slave, but it was not permissible under God’s law to do such things. Some might call that slavery in some sense, but what kind of slavery is it that does not allow the master to coerce his slave through violence? It is certainly not Roman slavery. Nor is it like slavery in the American South. 4. The New Testament commands Christians to treat slaves like brothers. When Paul writes to the slave owner Philemon about his runaway slave Onesimus, he tells him to receive Onesimus “no longer as a bondservant but more than a bondservant, as a beloved brother. . . . If you consider me your partner, receive him as you would receive me” (Philem. 16–17). What kind of slavery is it that tells a master to give up threatening and totreat his slave like his brother? Again, this is not Roman slavery, or slavery as inthe American South. So the Bible does not endorse either of those types of slavery.This is something else entirely. And this is why slavery cannot continue where thekingdom of God holds sway. The Bible completely undermines all of the definingfeatures of slavery: kidnapping, coercive violence, and the treatment of people asproperty rather as brothers created in the image of God. 5. The Bible encourages slaves to get out of slavery if they can. First Corinthians 7:21 says, “Were you a bondservant when called? Do not be concerned about it. (But if you can gain your freedom, avail yourself of the opportunity.)” If the Bible were endorsing slavery, it would not tell slaves to take opportunities to become free. Yet that is exactly what Paul does. 6. The Bible forbids Christians from voluntarily entering into slavery. First Corinthians 7:23 states, “You were bought with a price; do not become bondservants of men.” This command could not be clearer. If the Bible were endorsing slavery, it would not forbid Christians from becoming slaves. 7. The Bible condemns racism. As mentioned above, slavery in the NT was not race-based. But slavery in the American South was. The Bible forbids treating others as less than human because of their race. God created humans in his own image—all humans—not just white or black or any other racial group. Because of that, every person—not just some people—has inherent dignity and worth as an image-bearer of Almighty God. For this reason, the diversity of races is not an evil to be abolished but a glory to be celebrated. God intends to gather worshipers for himself from every “tribe and language and people and nation” (Rev. 5:9). And we know that in Christ “there is not Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave, free; but Christ is all, and in all” (Col. 3:11). In conclusion, the Bible does not endorse slavery nor the evils inherent in slavery. On the contrary, it abolishes them in the name of Jesus. Although the gospel of Jesus Christ does not command us to take up arms in violent revolution to abolish slavery, it does introduce a new kingdom into the world that will one day overthrow all unjust authorities. And we are called as the church to be an outpost of that coming kingdom. Wherever the church goes, slavery must flee, because the kingdom of Christ will not abide unjust authorities. When the critics assail Scripture, they often make confident assertions about things about which they know very little (1 Tim. 1:7). In this case, when they rail against the Bible’s alleged endorsement of slavery, they are misrepresenting what the Bible actually teaches. Every word of God is pure and good and wise and right for us—including what he says to us about those under the yoke. This article is by Denny Burk and is adapted from ESV Expository Commentary: Isaiah–Ezekiel (Volume 6).

Jesus Can’t Be Penitent If the Psalms give a window into the human emotions and affections of Jesus Christ, we must ask what we are to understand when the psalmists express repentance for sins. Can Jesus Christ be thought to have prayed these prayers? The obvious answer is no because Jesus Christ is without sin (John 8:46; Heb. 4:15); he has no sin to confess and no need for forgiveness. Perhaps, we think, we should say that Jesus does not and cannot pray these expressions of penitence. There are, however, three factors that may give us pause for thought. The first factor is that confessions of sin are woven into the fabric of the Psalms in such a way that it is not easy to excise them. Even when the socalled penitential psalms have been excluded (Pss. 6; 32; 38; 51; 102; 130; 143), we are left with penitence in a number of other places. Examples include (1) Psalm 19:12–14 (where “errors,” “hidden faults,” and “presumptuous sins” are admitted at least as possibilities); (2) Psalm 25:7, 11, and 18 (“Remember not the sins of my youth or my transgressions”; “Pardon my guilt, for it is great”; and “Forgive all my sins”); (3) Psalm 39:8 (“Deliver me from all my transgressions”); and (4) corporately, Psalm 90:7–11 (“our iniquities” and “our secret sins” vis-à-vis “your anger” and “your wrath”). The removal of penitence leaves the fabric of many psalms in shreds. The second factor is that sometimes part of a psalm may be quoted by or echoed of Jesus in the New Testament, while another part of the same psalm expresses penitence. Psalms 6, 31, 40, and 41 are striking examples. Psalm 6 (traditionally the first of the penitential psalms) begins with an awareness of the anger and wrath of God and a deep sorrow for sins (6:1–7), but it continues—in words strongly echoed by Jesus in Matthew 7:23 and Luke 13:27—with David telling the wicked to “depart from me.” It is unnatural to suppose that Jesus simply speaks the rebuke of Psalm 6:8 but does not voice the sorrow for sins of 6:1–7. In Luke 23:46 Jesus speaks the words of Psalm 31:5 from the cross (“Into your hand I commit my spirit”), and yet the same psalm has the clause “My strength fails because of my iniquity” (Ps. 31:10). It is awkward to suppose that Jesus speaks the words of 31:5 but not the remainder of the psalm. The words of Psalm 40:6–8 are quoted on the lips of Jesus in Hebrews 10:5–7 (“When Christ came into the world, he said . . .”). And yet in Psalm 40:12, David says, “My iniquities have overtaken me.” Again, it feels artificial to hear Psalm 40:6–8 on the lips of Jesus but to exclude Psalm 40:12. A verse from Psalm 41 is applied by Jesus to his betrayal by Judas Iscariot (“Even my close friend in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me,” Ps. 41:9; see John 13:18). And yet in Psalm 41:4, David says, “I have sinned against you.” Again, there is something arbitrary about supposing that David is a type of Christ in Psalm 41:9 but not in the whole of the psalm. The third factor is the deeply theological theme that from the very start of his life on earth, and emphatically from the beginning of his public ministry, the shadow of our sins fell on Jesus. Perhaps we see this most clearly when he submits to a baptism of repentance under the ministry of John the Baptist, in order to fulfill all righteousness (Matt. 3:13–15). He was “numbered with the transgressors” (Isa. 53:12) long before the climax, when he who knew no sin became sin for us (2 Cor. 5:21). The shadow of that terrible identification with sinners fell on Jesus long before the cross—certainly from the start of his public ministry. As the Heidelberg Catechism expresses it, “During his whole life on earth, but especially at the end, Christ sustained in body and soul the wrath of God against . . . sin.” Jesus Speaks as Our Covenant Head The combination of these three factors makes us wonder whether in some way Jesus can speak words of penitence in the Psalms as our covenant head to whom the sins of his people are imputed. Let me support and illustrate this argument from three modern writers. The first is the nineteenth-century Free Church of Scotland minister Hugh Martin (1822–1885). In his profound meditations on Gethsemane (published in 1875), Martin explores what it meant for our sins to be imputed to Jesus. With the letter to the Hebrews, he sees Jesus saying to the Father, in the words of Psalm 40:7–8 (quoting the KJV), “Lo, I come, in the volume of the book it is written of me; I delight to do thy will, O my God.” But he then quotes from a few verses later in the same psalm and writes that Jesus in Gethsemane “exclaims also, as one heavily laden with accumulated sins, and trembling, ashamed, and self-doomed because of them—‘Innumerable evils have compassed me about: mine iniquities have taken hold of me so that I am not able to look up; they are more than the hairs on my head, therefore my heart faileth me’ (Psa 40:12 [KJV]).” Martin goes on to write this: In forming a judgment of the sorrow and anguish which the imputation of sin to the holy Jesus must have caused, there is a vexing fallacy to be guarded against. We are ready to suppose that however hard and terrible to bear must have been the wrath and death which were the wages of the sins for which he suffered, yet the imputation of these sins to him could have, in itself, cost him little anxiety, or caused him little sorrow, in the consciousness that he was not personally guilty of them—the consciousness of his own unsullied holiness. Martin then points out that even the malicious and untrue accusations that people made against Jesus caused him great sorrow. And yet these were simply from people and were false. How much more, he reasons, when “God imputed to him—the Father whom he infinitely loved—the Judge whom he infinitely revered as one who could not do but what is right—reckoned him among transgressors.” He repudiates and denies the accusations of people (e.g., John 8:48–49). But he admits that the Father’s imputation of sins to him is completely righteous, “the proposal of infinitely righteous love and wisdom—the product and decree of divine Triune counsels from everlasting.” “True,” he continues, “the sins which were charged upon him were not his own, but they were so laid upon him and so became his, that he could not merely endure, but accept as righteous, the penalty which they entailed.” Indeed, “the sins themselves had first been made his—verily, really his—to every effect save that alone of impairing his unspotted personal holiness and perfection.” They were “his to cause him grief and sorrow inconceivable in their imputation.” “True,” Martin admits, they were not personally his own; and so they were not his to bring self-accusation, self-contempt, despondency, remorse, despair. But they were his sufficiently to induce upon his holy soul a shame, humiliation, sorrow—yea, sore amazement—as he stood at his Father’s tribunal, accountable for more than child of man shall ever account for unto eternity! Martin writes as one who knows he stands on holy ground. But he helps us begin to grasp what it might have meant for Jesus to speak in the language of the Psalms weighed down by the burden of sins. More briefly, Dietrich Bonhoeffer asks, “How can the sinless one ask for forgiveness?” He answers, In the same way that the sinless one can bear the sins of the world and be made sin for us (2 Cor. 5:21). Jesus prays for the forgiveness of sins, yet not for his own but ours, which he has taken upon himself and for which he suffers. He puts himself completely in our place; he wants to be a human being before God as we are. So Jesus prays even the most human of all prayers with us and, precisely in this, shows himself to be the true Son of God. Graeme Goldsworthy similarly writes, “In being made sin for us (2 Cor. 5:21), Jesus takes our place by accepting the role of evildoer for us, and defines the true nature of sin and the wrath of God upon it. There is, therefore, no aspect of the Psalms in the Old Testament that does not point to Jesus and find its ultimate meaning in him.” Despite being himself without sin, Jesus was so deeply identified with his people that he can speak these words as our covenant head. Now he leads us in expressing our sorrow for sins, our confession of sins, and our penitent turning from sins. In my view the most comprehensively biblical answer to this question is that Jesus our covenant head confesses the sins of his people in the penitential psalms and now leads us in repenting of our sins today. Jesus prays for the forgiveness of sins, yet not for his own but ours, which he has taken upon himself and for which he suffers. This article is adapted from The Psalms: A Christ-Centered Commentary by Christopher Ash.

The Ultimate Purpose of the Atonement Is the Glory of the Father Before determining for whom Christ died, it is necessary first to establish the ultimate purpose of his death. Doing so provides a starting point for evaluating other purposes and benefits of Christ’s death as stated in Scripture. According to the Synoptics and Johannine Literature, the ultimate purpose of Christ’s death is to display the glory of God definitively. The Son glorifies the Father by doing the work of the Father, which is to accomplish effectively the salvation of those whom the Father gave him. The Gospels repeatedly emphasize that everything Christ does is for the glory of the Father. According to John 1:14, a result of the incarnation is that “we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.” By alluding to Exodus 33–34, John asserts that the same glory displayed to Moses is now visible in the incarnate Word. Just a few verses later John further explains that this same Word in the flesh “has made him [God] known” (John 1:18). The Greek verb used here (ἐξηγέομαι) means “to provide detailed information in a systematic manner—‘to inform, to relate, to tell fully.’” The stunning point that John makes is that, as the Word-made-flesh, Jesus Christ is the fullest revelation of God. As such, John intends the reader to see that everything that Jesus says and does is a manifestation of God’s glory. Once Judas leaves to betray him, Jesus says to his remaining disciples, “Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him. If God is glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself, and glorify him at once.” By sending the betrayer off, Jesus sets in motion the chain of events that will lead to the ultimate expression of God’s glory—his sacrificial death and triumphant resurrection. Thus the ultimate sign that displays God’s glory is the death, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. Doing the Work of the Father Scripture does more than simply present the death of Jesus as glorifying the Father—it sets his death within the larger framework of the Son glorifying the Father by accomplishing the work that the Father gave him to do before he ever took on flesh. The Son agrees to display the glory of the Father by redeeming the people that the Father gave to him. As a result, these redeemed people will participate in the intra-Trinitarian communion shared by the Father and the Son from all eternity. Several passages in the Johannine literature describe this agreement. Let’s consider a particularly important one in the Bread of Life Discourse (John 6:22–58), where Jesus explains the work that the Father gave him to do. After identifying himself as the Bread of Life, Jesus asserts, All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. . . . No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day. (John 6:37–40, 44) Several times in this section Jesus emphasizes that he has come down from heaven to accomplish the will of the Father. From this passage, the plan established by the Father and the Son may be summarized as follows: (1) the Father gives a specific group of people to the Son; (2) the Son comes down from heaven to do the Father’s will; (3) the Father’s will is for the Son to lose none of them but raise them on the last day; (4) these people come to the Son by looking on him and believing; (5) the Son gives them eternal life; (6) the Son will raise them on the last day; and (7) no one can come to the Son unless the Father who sent the Son draws them. Thus it is the Father’s election of a specific group of people that defines who comes to the Son and is raised on the last day. This progression seriously undermines the contention that “the decree of election is logically after the decree of atonement, where also, in fact, it belongs in the working out of the application of salvation. That is to say, the atonement is general, its application particular.” According to John 6:37–44, the Father does not plan to send the Son to save everyone, and then only elect some, knowing that apart from such an election none would believe. Such a contention suggests that redemption circumscribes election; in other words, God’s general beneficence to all of mankind ultimately drives the atonement, and election is necessary only because without it none would believe. But John 6 indicates that the Father gives a specific group of people to the Son for whom he then comes to die in order to give them eternal life. Particularism attends the planning and the making of the atonement, not just its application. Thus it is election that circumscribes the atonement, not the other way around. Jesus Died to Accomplish the Salvation of His People Complementary to the first point, there are many texts that specify that Jesus died for a particular group of people who are described in various ways. Matthew indicates from the very beginning of his Gospel that the work of Jesus is for his people. The angel of the Lord tells Joseph that Mary “will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21). More than simply explaining the etymology of Jesus’s name, the angelic announcement indicates that the salvation which Jesus will accomplish is specifically for his people. The remainder of Matthew fleshes out the identity of “his people,” often with surprising results. Two passages in particular are crucial for determining the referent of “his people.” Matthew 20:28 Shortly before his final entry into Jerusalem, Jesus responds to the request of James and John for special places of honor in the Messianic kingdom (Matt. 20:20–28). In contrasting greatness in the kingdom with greatness in this age, Jesus points to his own example when he states that “the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many [ἀντὶ πολλῶν]” (Matt. 20:28). Although it is possible to take “many” as synonymous with “all,” there are reasons to see a narrower reference. First, Jesus likely echoes the language of Isaiah 52:13–53:12, where the Servant dies on behalf of the many. Within that passage, “the many” (οἱ πολλοί [LXX]) refers to those to whom the saving work of the Servant is actually applied, including not only Jews but “many nations” (Isa. 52:15) as well. Second, the language of ransom (λύτρον) indicates the payment of a specific price (Jesus’s life) for the release of a specific people (many). His life is given in exchange for (ἀντί) that of the many, not for all without exception. Matthew 26:28 During the Last Supper (Matt. 26:26–29), Jesus offers the cup to his disciples and explains, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matt. 26:28). Just as the sprinkling of blood sealed a particular people in the old covenant (Ex. 24:1–8), so here the inauguration of the new covenant requires Jesus to shed his blood for a particular people. That particular people is the “many” for whom Jesus gives his life as a ransom (Matt. 20:28). The combination of “many” and “forgiveness of sins” here in Matthew 26:28 forges a link back to the angelic announcement in Matthew 1:21 that Jesus “will save his people from their sins.” Furthermore, this combination likely alludes again to the work of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53. Thus “his people” in Matthew 1:21 is further clarified by the “many” in Matthew 20:28 and Matthew 26:28 for whom Jesus dies to forgive their sins. As the fulfillment of the OT hope, Jesus seals the new covenant by ransoming a particular people from their bondage to sin through his death and resurrection. These texts emphasize Jesus dying for a particular group of people rather than for humanity in general. Regardless of whether the term used is “many” or “his people,” the point remains the same: Jesus gave his life as a ransom for the eschatological people of God, composed of Jews and Gentiles who believe in him. Johannine Literature We find the same kind of particularist statements in the Johannine literature. But unlike the Synoptics, John also includes numerous statements about God’s election of a particular people to receive the benefits of Jesus’s death. In addition to John 6, which was treated above, the following passages are particularly significant. In John 10:11–18, Jesus presents himself as the Good Shepherd who lays down his life for his sheep (John 10:11). Jesus further describes these sheep as “my own,” who know him “just as the Father knows me and I know the Father” (John 10:15). But who are these sheep? They are the eschatological people of God, drawn from Jew and Gentile alike (John 10:16). The religious leaders do not believe because they are not part of Jesus’s flock (John 10:26). By contrast, Jesus’s sheep hear his voice, follow him, and are given eternal life (John 10:27–28). They are his sheep because the Father gave them to the Son (John 10:29). Notice that Jesus does not say that the religious leaders are not part of his flock because they do not believe. Rather, Jesus makes it clear that the unbelief of the religious leaders is an outworking of the fact that they are not his sheep. From this passage we see that Jesus’s sheep are a particular set of people that exist before they exercise faith in him, and that those who are not part of that divinely selected group do not believe (cf. John 8:47). As the Good Shepherd, Jesus lays down his life for a particular group of people (his sheep) in distinction from others (those who are not his sheep). John even describes Jesus’s enemies as testifying that his death was directed toward a particular group of people. In the wake of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead, the Sanhedrin meets in an emergency session to discuss what to do about Jesus (John 11:47–53). The high priest Caiaphas argues that “it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish” (John 11:50). John goes on to explain that Caiaphas was unwittingly prophesying “that Jesus would die for the nation, and not for the nation only, but also to gather into one the children of God who are scattered abroad” (John 11:51–52). Whereas Caiaphas clearly means that the death of Jesus would spare the Jewish people from trouble with Rome, John sees the theological significance of the statement. Jesus’s death is for “the nation” (i.e., the Jewish people) as well as others who must be gathered into the united children of God. Following on the heels of the discussion of Jesus’s sheep in chapter 10, we should understand this as a reiteration of the idea that the true people of God, composed of Jew and Gentile alike, are the people for whom Jesus dies. As Jesus prepares his disciples for his impending death, he once again stresses that it is for a particular group of people. After commanding his disciples to love one another as he has loved them (John 15:12), Jesus describes the nature of his love: “Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13). Just as the Good Shepherd lays down his life for the sheep, so here Jesus lays down his life for his friends out of love for them. This particular love for his friends is grounded in divine election: “You did not choose me, but I chose you” (John 15:16). Summary This collection of texts, drawn primarily from the Johannine writings and supported by texts in the Synoptic Gospels as well, demonstrates that when Jesus lived, died, rose, ascended, and interceded, he did so for a particular group of people. This group is variously referred to as his people, the church, the many, his sheep, the children of God, and his friends. They are the ones whom the Father has given to the Son before he came to earth, and whom the Father draws so that they come to the Son, who then grants them eternal life. Drawn from every tribe and language and people and nation, they are the sheep for whom the Good Shepherd lays down his life and who will share in the intra-Trinitarian love and glory. The Son glorifies the Father by doing the work of the Father, which is to accomplish effectively the salvation of those whom the Father gave him. This article is by Matthew S. Harmon and is adapted from From Heaven He Came and Sought Her: Definite Atonement in Historical, Biblical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspective edited by David Gibson and Jonathan Gibson.

Be careful to follow every command I am giving you today, so that you may live and increase and may enter and possess the land the LORD promised on oath to your ancestors. Remember how the LORD your God led you all the way in the wilderness these forty years, to humble and test you in order to know what was in your heart, whether or not you would keep his commands. He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna, which neither you nor your ancestors had known, to teach you that man does not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of the LORD. Your clothes did not wear out and your feet did not swell during these forty years. Deuteronomy 8:1-4 When God provided the miraculous manna, he provided just enough. The description’s pretty precise. Those who gathered a lot had nothing left over, and those who gathered a little had enough. Then he gave them a curious command: “No one is to keep any of it until morning” (Exodus 16:19). Why would God forbid leftovers? What’s wrong with taking a little initiative and gathering enough manna for a couple days or weeks? Here’s my take on the manna miracle: The manna was a daily reminder of their daily dependence on God. God wanted to cultivate their daily dependence by providing for their needs on a daily basis. Nothing’s changed. We want a one-week or one-month or one-year supply of God’s provision, but God wants us to drop to our knees every day in raw dependence on him. And God knows that if he provided too much too soon, we’d lose our spiritual hunger. He knows we’d stop trusting in our Provider and start trusting in the provision. Spiritual maturity is often confused with independence. It’s the exact opposite. The goal is codependence on God. God didn’t design us to “grow up” and be independent from him. Our desire for self-sufficiency is a subtle expression of our sinful nature. It’s a desire to get to a place where we don’t need God, don’t need faith, don’t need a local church home, and don’t need to pray. We want God to provide more so we need him less. That’s just not the way it’s supposed to work. Drawn from the NIV Bible for Teen Guys. Article from The Circle Maker Student Edition by Mark Batterson with Parker Batterson, copyright © 2012 by Mark Batterson, published by Zondervan.

Living in this broken world, people know defeat all too well. Everyone has experienced a relationship where someone let them down, or a situation that didn’t work out the way they hoped. These moments of disappointment or frustration reveal the tragic fact that this world is deeply flawed. Even though believers live in the hope of the resurrection and the victorious life that Jesus promises through his Spirit, he still calls us to live in this world, where we experience death, brokenness, mourning and pain (in contrast to the coming kingdom: Revelation 21:4). Jesus’ resurrection reveals to believers the true way to life. Those who think that the abundant life consists of finding one’s way around suffering and hardship have a misguided perception of what Jesus promised. Jesus’ life and example teach that the way to a full life consists of service, hardship, opposition, pain and suffering. Believers look at Jesus’ life and see that God’s best plan for his Son was to stay close to him through the most unimaginable of circumstances. The New Testament shows many times over that God was with his Son until the end, when Jesus took our sin upon himself and suffered on the cross. But the good news is God didn’t leave his Son in the grave! Because Jesus submitted to the point of death, and then defeated death, he paved the way for all people to find eternal life. By submitting himself to death, Jesus found life. “For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it” (Mark 8:35). It’s only in surrendering to his will and his way that believers actually find the fullness of life as God intended it. In all of this, Jesus is victorious. He was, is, and will always be undefeated by sin, by death and by the grave. His victory is found in the fact that he was, and is, a selfless servant. In graciously giving his life, he also created a pathway to the life that is truly life eternal. Drawn from The Jesus Bible, NIV.

Shepherds: They appear in surprising places throughout the Old Testament. Beginning with Adam and Eve’s son Abel, who kept flocks of sheep, these biblical shepherds appear not just out in the fields, but in royal palaces as well. Jacob the patriarch started with nothing back in his grandfather’s homeland, but he built enormous wealth through his clever care of sheep and goats (Genesis 30:25-43). Moses was a prince in Egypt before he was driven into exile. Later, he was tending his father-in-law’s flock deep in the wilderness when God appeared to him (Exodus 3). God called Moses to lead Israel out of their suffering in Egypt, shepherding them to their new home. David was, by his own account, a ferocious protector of his sheep, rescuing them from a lion and a bear (1 Samuel 17:33-37). The elders of Israel said to him, “And the LORD your God said to you, ‘You will shepherd my people Israel, and you will become their ruler’” (1 Chronicles 11:1-2). On the other end of the spectrum, King Ahab worshiped any god but the God of Israel, and he married Jezebel, a princess from Sidon who led Israel far away from worshiping the true God (1 Kings 16—22). In a tragic encounter, the prophet Micaiah uses shepherd imagery to foretell Ahab’s death in battle: “I saw all Israel scattered on the hills like sheep without a shepherd, and the Lord said, ‘These people have no master. Let each one go home in peace’” 1 Kings 22:17). So many key biblical leaders were either actual shepherds or were seen as shepherds of God’s people. But the kings, like Ahab, strayed far from the ways of King David and the heart of God. The prophet Ezekiel lived in Babylon among the exiles from Judah. In Ezekiel 34, he offers an indictment of the leaders who were still in Jerusalem: Woe to you shepherds of Israel who only take care of yourselves! Should not shepherds take care of the flock? You eat the curds, clothe yourselves with the wool and slaughter the choice animals, but you do not take care of the flock. You have not strengthened the weak or healed the sick or bound up the injured. You have not brought back the strays or searched for the lost. You have ruled them harshly and brutally. So they were scattered because there was no shepherd, and when they were scattered they became food for all the wild animals. My sheep wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. They were scattered over the whole earth, and no one searched or looked for them (Ezekiel 34:2-6). What a bleak picture of the leaders entrusted to care for God’s people! Brokenhearted, God declares through Ezekiel: “I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so will I look after my sheep” (Ezekiel 34:11-12). Can you hear echoes of this glorious Old Testament promise in these New Testament passages? When Jesus landed and saw a large crowd, he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. So he began teaching them many things (Mark 6:34). “Suppose one of you has a hundred sheep and loses one of them. Doesnʼt he leave the ninety-nine in the open country and go after the lost sheep until he finds it?” (Luke 15:4). “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). These moments from Jesus’ life show that He is nothing like the bad kings or bad shepherds from the Old Testament. Instead, He is fulfilling God’s promise to search for, heal, and provide for lost sheep everywhere. And who was more fit to bear witness to the birth of our good Shepherd than the lowly shepherds out in the fields of Bethlehem? And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night. An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified. But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger” (Luke 2:8-12). During all seasons of life, let us remember and celebrate that, in King Jesus, God has kept His promise to rescue and care for His sheep. He is the good Shepherd that we need. By John Dunham, Translation Technology Operations at Biblica.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD.“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater, so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it. You will go out in joy and be led forth in peace; the mountains and hillswill burst into song before you, and all the trees of the fieldwill clap their hands. Instead of the thornbush will grow the juniper, and instead of briers the myrtle will grow. This will be for the LORD’s renown, for an everlasting sign, that will endure forever.”Isaiah 55:8-13 How God does things is often not how we would do things. Isaiah reminds us that his ways are higher, his thoughts are utterly different than our own. In short, he is God, and we are not. Isaiah ends this passage with joy. As we trust in God and his ways, joy returns. We don’t have to figure everything out. We don’t have to rely on our own frail understanding. Our sovereign, powerful God has a good plan, and that plan involves his presence going before us. Sometimes we cannot see how a painful situation will ever work out. Where we see thorn bushes, God sees junipers. Where we see briers, God sees the myrtle. He makes beauty from ashes, life from death, hope from hopelessness. Because his ways are higher, and we can’t understand everything that is happening, we can trust that he will do good things in and through us. It’s one thing to have faith in our own ways, but it is quite another to truly have faith in the ways of God. He is the master of miracles. May today be a day that you have complete faith in God’s ways. Prayer Lord, my ways are understandable and explainable, but your ways? They are higher than my highest thought. Help me to have faith in your ways, relying on you and what you can do. I choose to follow you, come what may. Amen. Application What struggle in your life right now would you like to see God turn around? Ask him to intervene. Drawn from the NIV Radiant Virtues Bible.

Covenant Theology on Israel and the Church Israel is often on people’s minds. Unrest ebbs and flows in the Middle East, with Israel front and center, giving rise to practical and theological questions. Are Israelites a people of God distinct from the church? Is God with them, whether or not they believe in Christ? What is their destiny? How should Christians relate to Jews? The list goes on and, frankly, I hesitate to enter the fray. When the most recent conflict in Israel broke out, someone at a church fellowship said to me, “You are the doctor of theology here. What should we think and do about Israel?” I stand by my reply: “I am neither competent nor able to speak to politics, but I can point people to Christ through Scripture.” The Bible’s covenant theology has something to say about the relationship between Israel and the church. Rather than politics, biblical answers tell us more about the breathtaking unity of Scripture and how Jews and Gentiles relate to Christ than other questions we might have. Ultimately, there is one people of God, including the salvation of the nations from the beginning, and Israel has a special place in God’s plan for the church. Is There One People of God? Moving the elephant in the room out of the way, Scripture does not teach that Israel and the church are two peoples of God with two destinies, one earthly (Israel) and one heavenly (the church). “Covenant” highlights the breathtaking unity of Scripture, making Jews and Gentiles one people of God in Christ (Eph. 2:15). From the “first promise” of the “seed of the woman” who would crush the serpent’s head (Gen. 3:15) to one of the last promises of God’s heavenly dwelling with his people as their God (Rev. 21:3), covenant theology pulls together everything in between. The result is that we view the Bible more like a grand, epic narrative than like a collection of short stories. Seeing God’s promise to undo the ruin Satan brought through sin ties together all the pages of Scripture like a seamless thread. In this light, the promise to Abraham, that in his seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Gen. 22:18), fits both Genesis 3:15 and Galatians 3:14, in which “the blessing of Abraham” applies to believers now. The “seed of the woman’s” suffering in the place of his people resurfaces in important passages like Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, and Romans 16:20. Moses’s leading the people out of Egypt, and everything else he did, flowed from God’s remembering his covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Ex. 2:24–25). David looked to God to forgive sins and change hearts (Ps. 51), and he pleaded that the deliverer would come through one of his descendants (2 Sam. 7; Ps. 89; Ps. 132). Solomon celebrated God’s faithfulness in establishing his seed (of the woman) over the ends of the earth, bringing blessings to all nations (Ps. 72). Peter urged believers to look to Christ’s return, teaching them that God preserves the world now for the sake of the elect, just as he did in Noah’s covenant in Genesis 6–9 (2 Pet. 3:8–9). Covenant theology is a blessing because whatever book of Scripture we find ourselves in, every part reminds us of other parts. The entire book is about God’s covenant with his people, always pointing them to Christ (Lk. 24:44–46). Not only does the Old Testament fit with the New but the New starts to look like an inevitable result of the Old, without which the story would be incomplete. A single covenant of grace envelops both Jews and Gentiles in eternal life in Christ: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (Gal. 3:28–29). Whether we consider God’s covenant with Adam, Noah, Abraham, David, or with believers today under the new covenant in Christ, the “blessing of Abraham” (Gal. 3:14) comes on all believers, Jew and Gentile, who are “baptized into Christ” (Gal. 3:27). Teaching that believing Israel and the faithful church are two peoples of God with two separate destinies (so-called Dispensationalism) fractures Scripture, blurring our vision of the single-minded plan of salvation from the Triune God. Is There Any Place Left for Israel? Thankfully, the apostle Paul asked and answered this question. Romans 9–11 more or less asks, “If the gospel is so great, then why did so many Jewish people reject Christ?” Paul gives three basic answers: God chose some Jews to believe in Christ, yet the rest did not believe in Christ when they should have, and God is not done with them yet. Picking up the last part of this three-part movement, it is important for us to grasp Paul’s reasoning. A cursory run through the text shows that even though the church consists of one believing people of God sharing a single destiny in Christ, God promises to bring large numbers of Jewish people to faith in Christ before the story ends. First, “God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew” (Rom. 11:2). As Paul belonged to an elect Jewish remnant, the Lord saved the same under Elijah’s ministry (Rom. 11:1-10), so some Israelites “according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:3) are still being saved by God’s grace in Christ. Second, “their failure” (Rom. 11:12) had a divine purpose: “riches for the Gentiles.” Using two illustrations, Paul notes that the “dough” or “firstfruits” of Israel is still, in some sense, a holy lump (Rom. 11:16), and that Israel is like a tree with roots in the Old Testament growing up into the New (Rom. 11:17-24). When the Jews fell like branches cut from their own tree, God grafted Gentile branches into the tree through faith. Jewish branches were cut off for unbelief, and so can Gentile branches if they turn from Christ (Rom. 11:20-21). Yet another divine purpose follows on the heels of God’s mercy to the Gentiles. Paul hoped to provoke unbelieving Israelites to jealousy toward their lost blessings. He not only says that “God has the power to graft them in again” (Rom. 11:23), but he hints at “their full inclusion” (Rom. 11:12) and “their acceptance” (Rom. 11:15) in the future. The Lord saves an elect remnant of Israelites through Christ, while the rest fell for “the reconciliation of the world.” But God is not done with the people he cut out of the tree; their return to God through faith in Christ, within the Christian church, will be like “life from the dead” (Rom. 11:15). Gentiles came into the church through faith in Christ, and unbelieving Israelites will come back in through faith in him as well. Third, “all Israel will be saved” in the future when “the fullness of the Gentiles” has come in (Rom. 11:26). Just as most Israelites rejected Christ in the past and few believe in him now, so most will return to him in the future. Verses 28-36 become a litmus test of whether we understand the relationship between Israel and the church. Let’s be clear; there is one people of God—Old Testament and New Testament—with Gentile salvation in view in one covenant of grace from the start. Jews, Gentiles, men, women, slaves, and free people are all Abraham’s children through faith in Christ. Yet men and women still had distinct responsibilities in marriage, Christian slaves were still in bondage, and believing free people retained distinct advantages. So Jews are still Jews and Gentiles are still Gentiles, even if they worship God through Christ by the Spirit together, without a temple, Levitical priests, festivals, and sacrifices. Yet though most of the Christian church through most of its history has seen a future conversion of ethnic Jews to Christ, becoming one with believing Gentiles and worshiping God in one church, some seek to guard the unity of the covenant of grace and oneness of the church by taking “all Israel” as the church or the elect remnant. Yet if “all Israel” is the church or the elect remnant, how could Paul say, As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all” (Rom. 11:28–32). Inserting anything other than ethnic Israel into this passage makes nonsense out of it. Is the church or are the elect enemies of the elect church? Are Gentile believers beloved for the sake of the fathers? Have elect believers been disobedient in order that elect believers might be obedient? Instead, we should share Paul’s hope that in the future, God will reincorporate Israel into the Christian church through faith in Jesus Christ. Conclusion: How Should We Respond? We should read the Bible as one story, of one covenant of grace, with one church united in Christ, with Gentile salvation in view from the beginning. Yet we should also believe that God has a future plan for ethnic Jews, not by giving them a separate destiny as a separate people of God but by bringing them back to Jesus Christ through faith. This should lead us to pray that the gospel would be “propagated throughout the world, the Jews called, [and] the fullness of the Gentiles brought in.” Maybe it will lead some of us to consider missions to Jewish people, lovingly calling them to become jealous of the blessings we have in Christ by the Spirit. Above all, the Triune God’s unified covenant of grace and his wise methods of bringing Jews and Gentiles as one people of God into one church should lead to doxology: Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! “For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?” “Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?” For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen (Rom. 11:33–36). Not only does the Old Testament fit with the New but the New starts to look like an inevitable result of the Old, without which the story would be incomplete. Ryan M. McGraw is the author of What Is Covenant Theology?: Tracing God's Promises through the Son, the Seed, and the Sacraments.

Getting Started For years I’ve written articles and books about evangelism. On the surface, this looks like a desire to help foster evangelism in the Christian community. And it’s true; I do desire that. But on a deeper level, it stems from working out my internal angst concerning evangelism. How do I present the gospel honestly and boldly without needlessly offending? How do I ensure I don’t slip into heresy by adding or subtracting from the gospel? When do I need to remember that the gospel is offensive to those who love their sin and rebellion and that their distaste for the gospel has nothing to do with me at all? Can you identify with this inner struggle? After decades of asking myself questions just like these, I'd like to offer seven suggestions for you to keep in mind as you consider how to get started in evangelism. 1. Sweep away misconceptions in your head about evangelism. It’s easy to listen to well-meaning believers and get the wrong idea about evangelism. The mistaken ideas are almost too numerous to list. Evangelism is not about how many people you lead to Christ, though it’s beautiful when that happens. Certainly, evangelism must happen for people to come to Jesus, as Paul stresses in Romans 10:17, “So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.” But evangelism happens even if people don’t come to Jesus. Neither is evangelism merely showing our good works. Evangelism is a message, and a message must be spoken. Nor is evangelism a method, a memorized set of questions that lead people to the conclusion that they must commit their lives to Jesus. Evangelism is merely teaching, sharing, or preaching the gospel with the desire in your heart for someone to come to faith. As Paul says, “. . . we persuade . . .” (2 Cor. 5:11). 2. Prepare your heart. Of course, you should pray about evangelism. Everybody says that, and for numerous good reasons. It’s mainly good to pray because I usually forget to. But remember, it is good to pray for unbelievers to come to faith because it’s biblical. Paul sets the example again in Romans 10:1 when he says his heart’s desire and prayer is for his people, the Jews, to come to faith. So pray that God would soften the hearts of those you know who don’t know the Lord. Praying for others’ conversion reminds us that it is the Holy Spirit’s job to convert, not ours. It reminds us that faith is a gift from God, a gift God longs to give. There are other good reasons to pray for unbelievers to come to faith. Best of all, it shapes our hearts to be more in line with the heart of God. I find that when I pray, my heart develops in its love for the lost and a greater awareness of the needs around me. 3. Recognize this is not about your personality. People justify their lack of evangelism by saying they don’t have the right personality. I’m unsure where this idea comes from, but it’s hogwash. Both introverts and extroverts struggle with evangelism. For most personalities, evangelism is always pushing the ball uphill. Extroverts are sorely tempted to twist the gospel to fit the hearer. Some of the most effective evangelists I know are introverts. Evangelism does not start with the right personality but rather an awareness that Christians are creatures who live in the physical world and yet have been given the gift of knowing the reality of the spiritual world. It’s an awareness that every person you meet is headed to one of two ends: a glorious eternal existence in a paradise that we can barely imagine or an immortal existence in what Jesus called “outer darkness.” This understanding helps us frame evangelism correctly. It’s helpful to know that evangelism may be expressed differently for different personality types, but it’s the same gospel. 4. Recognize you can get better at it. Many talk about “pre-evangelism,” which is helping people get ready to hear the gospel. I’m not sure what pre-evangelism is or whether it’s a particularly good biblical term, but anyway, nobody talks about post-evangelism. For the record, I’m the best post-evangelist I know: “I should have said this,” or “I forgot to say that.” I’m always going over in my mind better things I could have said. It used to be that I would beat myself up about that, but over the years, I’ve come to see this as more of a sharpening exercise for next time rather than a defeat. Like all spiritual disciplines, evangelism is not something you do perfectly every time. There is always room to grow. So read books about apologetics to be equipped to sweep away objections. Listen carefully to testimonies of how people came to Jesus. Think through how to turn conversations into spiritual conversations. 5. Rehearse the gospel. Use it or lose it. Become a student of the gospel. As I’ve mentioned, the gospel is a message with some complexity, so it must be studied. If you study it well, you can say it well. So first, nail down the essentials of the gospel. Who God is (holy, loving, creator, Father). Who we are before God (valuable creatures, made in God’s image and reflecting his glory, yet in rebellion to God’s ways and slaves to our sin). Who Jesus is (the divine son of God, equal to God and fully man, who came with a rescue mission to save us out of darkness and move us into God’s light and fellowship by willingly offering his life as a ransom payment for our sin, and then proving his words and actions true through his resurrection from the dead). And what we are then to do (repent of our sin, which is primarily our disbelief that God’s way is the right way, and put our entire faith in Jesus). Entire books could be written about each part of the gospel mentioned above, so don’t just memorize it; keep working at its meaning. Connect those four principles of the gospel with Scripture. It’s a rich treasure trove of spiritual knowledge. Turn it over in your mind and think of ways to say it accurately but without jargon. 6. Think of specific steps you can take. This is where the rubber meets the road. First, think through your non-Christian friends, neighbors, fellow students, co-workers, and relatives you know. Write their names down and pray for them, as in point number two. New believers will probably have long lists, and people walking with the Lord for a long time may have shorter lists. Think through if there is some friendship work that needs to be done so that you can come to the point of sharing the gospel (Okay, maybe that’s what pre-evangelism is). Perhaps it’s inviting them to church, though you should remember that inviting someone to church is not you doing evangelism. Now, hopefully, your pastor makes the gospel clear with every sermon, but regardless, your evangelism starts after the service when you ask, “What did you think of the service?” Maybe it’s making a friend at church who is a seeker and inviting them over for lunch after the service. Relatives are complex, but you could email them and tell them that you’ve been thinking about them (praying for them) and would like to have a spiritual discussion. For others, it may be the bold step to start a neighborhood Bible study. University students, you have the best opportunities for evangelism as your living situation, work life (your studies), and social circles are all nearby; these things will all be divided once you graduate. So, students, take advantage of this and start an outreach Bible study. Everyone should get used to asking people, “Are you interested in spiritual things?” or “What’s your faith background?” 7. Take the plunge. One of the greatest needs in evangelism is not endless preparation but boldness and clarity. In Ephesians 6:19, Paul requested prayer that he be bold and clear with the gospel, which should be on our hearts too. As I say often—I hate to sound like an old sneaker commercial—“Just do it.” Fix your mind on Christ and take the plunge. See where the Holy Spirit brings you. And most of all, keep at it. Persevere! I listened to four reports of the year-end campus ministry called “ACross” at the University of Louisville just yesterday. This group of students is deeply motivated to reach their campus for Jesus. The first three stories were terrific reports of how the gospel had been proclaimed to numerous people, many of whom came to faith. What an encouragement. The last testimony came from a young woman named Megan. She stood up shyly and said, “Eight months ago, I didn’t even know what evangelism was.” But she had been convicted at a Christian conference to share her faith. Megan dug deep and stepped out. First, she tried to organize a Bible study with some friends, but nobody showed up. Then she started giving a ride to a fellow student in her nursing program who informed Megan she was a worshiper of Aphrodite (a true pagan!). Though they read some in the Bible, eventually, she told Megan not to talk to her about Christianity. Megan continued to give her rides. Megan then met with another classmate, and they read through Greg Gilbert’s book What Is the Gospel? in its entirety, but in the end, the woman said that Christianity didn’t fit with her lesbian lifestyle. Megan shared the gospel with another friend who just thought Megan was weird. And that’s how her story ended. Everything Megan tried, I recommend: Bible study, book study, and one-on-one sharing of the gospel. But nobody came to faith or even seemed all that interested in the message Megan had for them. But Megan was faithful. And far from giving up, Megan spoke of how much she had learned and how grateful she was to God. She said she was looking forward to reaching out next semester on campus—Wow! For me, that makes Megan an evangelistic hero. And I think that’s how God sees it too. Evangelism is merely teaching, sharing, or preaching the gospel with the desire in your heart for someone to come to faith. J. Mack Stiles is the author of How Do I Get Started in Evangelism?

Luke 9:57–62 - 57As they were going along the road, someone said to him, “I will follow you wherever you go.” 58And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head.” 59To another he said, “Follow me.” But he said, “Lord, let me first go and bury my father.” 60And Jesus1 said to him, “Leave the dead to bury their own dead. But as for you, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” 61Yet another said, “I will follow you, Lord, but let me first say farewell to those at my home.” 62Jesus said to him, “No one who puts his hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.” Kingdom Priorities The journey motif continues, for Jesus and his disciples are on their way to Jerusalem (Luke 9:51, 53), which, as we know, means that he is on his way to die. A would-be disciple approaches, promising to follow Jesus to any and all destinations. Jesus desires the man to understand what following him means, using illustrations from the world of mammals and birds. Foxes have holes in which to reside, and birds build nests for themselves and their young. Jesus, however, as the Son of Man, cannot call anywhere home. He has no permanent residence or fixed location to call his own. Thus the man who claims he would follow Jesus everywhere must realize that following Jesus requires being willing to forsake one’s home. Jesus offers no guarantees of comfort or of the security that comes from having a place in which to dwell. Jesus encounters another man and calls him to follow him as a disciple. The man says that he must first bury his father before doing so. Burying one’s parents was considered a sacred duty in Jewish circles (Gen. 46:4; 49:29–50:13). Failure to do so would mean that one was not a responsible or godly son (cf. Jer. 16:5–7; Ezek. 24:15–24). Jesus replies in a way that would have shocked his contemporaries, saying that the dead should bury the dead. The man’s priority should be proclaiming the kingdom of God. Jesus probably means that those who are spiritually dead should bury those who are physically dead. Disciples have a more important calling and responsibility: heralding the good news of the kingdom. Another man also wants to follow Jesus and to be his disciple. But he feels that he must fulfill his family duty and say goodbye to his family before doing so. The request seems reasonable. Even Elijah allowed Elisha to say goodbye to his family before the latter left his home (1 Kings 19:20). Shockingly, however, Jesus rejects the proposal, picking up an image from plowing, which was what Elisha was doing when Elijah called him (1 Kings 19:19–21). Those who start plowing and then turn back for other matters are unfit for the kingdom. When plowing, one must look straight ahead; if one looks back, especially on rocky ground, the plow will go askew. Looking back is not just a “momentary glance” but represents going back to one’s family. Lot’s wife looked back (Gen. 19:26), as did the nation of Israel after leaving Egypt (Ex. 16:3), and both longed for their old life. We see, incidentally, that discipleship is not something above and beyond salvation. Those who are not disciples of Jesus do not belong to the kingdom; they are citizens of another realm. We see here that family is subordinated to the kingdom, to the call of Jesus. We see in these verses that following Jesus requires uncompromising commitment. A judge friend of mine said we must beware of “fuffrah”—fluffy Christianity that does not fit with costly discipleship. We tend to say to those who are half-interested that they are at least “in the circle,” but Jesus challenges us, asking if we are serious about following him; he rejects half-hearted followers. We learn that family does not come first—Jesus does. Perhaps God will call some of us to proclaim the gospel in dangerous places. Let us never make an idol of our families so that family relationships become more important than the kingdom of God. I have heard people say that they will not go to a certain place because of the weather or because it is too far from family, but as disciples of Jesus we cannot and must not say such things. We must be willing to go wherever and whenever Jesus wants us to go. We cannot tell God how close we will be to our parents or children. Of course, we cannot follow him apart from his grace or apart from his Spirit in our hearts. And, when we follow him, he will grant us joy inexpressible and full of glory. We will have no regrets or remorse for doing his will. We will be full of joy that the world does not understand. We must be willing to go wherever and whenever Jesus wants us to go. This article is by Thomas R. Schreiner and is adapted from ESV Expository Commentary: Matthew–Luke (Volume 8) edited by Iain M. Duguid, James M. Hamilton Jr., and Jay Sklar.

The “fruit” of the Holy Spirit refers to the godly attributes of those who “walk in the Spirit” (Galatians 5:16). The true manifestation of the Holy Spirit at work in a believer’s life is that the believer becomes increasingly more like Christ in character and actions. The fruit of the Spirit should characterize the life of every believer. Today we take a look at three fruits of the Spirit found in Galatians 5:22 — love, joy, and peace. Love In both Hebrew (ahab) and Greek (agapē), words translated “love” are action words, indicating conscious acts on behalf of a beloved. However, biblical love seems to demand going beyond merely a particular behavior to include a certain inner attitude, that is, a positive inner response (1 John 3:17). While several Greek words describe specific forms of love, the Greek word agapē most expresses Christlike, selfless love. Unselfish, loyal, benevolent concern for the well-being of another is called by Paul “the greatest” gift of all (1 Corinthians 13:13). Christian love is a fruit of the Holy Spirit, a virtue of godly living (Galatians 5:22). The attributes of love reflect both feelings and loving acts (1 Corinthians 13:4–8). True love is characterized as: • Patient and slow to anger (verse 4)• Kind and gentle to all (verse 4)• Unselfish and giving (verse 5)• Truthful and honest (verse 6)• Hopeful and encouraging (verse 7)• Enduring, without end (verse 7) Biblical love is not envious, proud, self-centered, rude, or provoking (1 Corinthians 13:4, 5). Without love, the gifts of the Spirit are deemed worthless, and the fruit of the Spirit incomplete (verse 8). Christian love is eternal. While all else fails, love never fails. It is a permanent, unconditional concern for others that results from the indwelling power of the Holy Spirit, rather than from human effort or desire. Joy A number of Hebrew and Greek words are used in the Bible to convey the concept of joy. In fact, the word “joy” is found more than 150 times in the Bible. Joy comes from God as a result of faith and obedience (John 15:10, 11; Romans 15:13). The abundance of joy is in direct proportion to the intimacy and steadfastness of a believer’s walk with the Lord. Sin in a believer’s life can rob joy (Psalm 51:8, 12). True joy is evident regardless of circumstances. The Spirit-filled believer continues to rejoice even amidst troubles (James 1:2, 3). Biblical joy is clearly different from earthly, temporal pleasures that are bound to circumstances. The purpose of joy is to provide blessing for the believer. Joy enables you to enjoy all that God has given — health, family, friends, opportunities, and salvation. As you experience true joy, your joy can then be shared with others (Romans 12:15). Abundant joy is a fruit of the Holy Spirit for those who walk in faith. Peace In both the Old and New Testaments, peace is described as the result of having a right relationship with God and with others (see Romans 5:1, 2). The Greek word eirene has a meaning similar to the Hebrew word shalom. Spiritual peace describes a sense of well-being and fulfillment that comes from God and is dependent on His presence alone (Galatians 5:22). Inner spiritual peace is experienced by any believer who walks in the Spirit despite surrounding turmoil. The true “peace of God” protects the hearts and minds of believers from worry, fear, and anxiety. It transcends all logic or rationale (Philippians 4:7). The God of Peace who offers salvation also promises His presence and power in the lives of His children. His presence creates in us a quiet confidence, regardless of circumstances, people, or things. Though impossible to comprehend fully, true peace is a fruit of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22) and a part of the “whole armor of God” (Ephesians 6:11, 13). According to the apostle Paul, our understanding and experiencing of the gospel produces peace that allows us to walk boldly into spiritual battle (Ephesians 6:11, 13) and to survive all manner of difficulty and danger. The believer receives peace from God as a virtue of holy living and a protection from evil forces. Where the peace of God is present, there is no room for worry. Reflecting the Character of God The fruit of the Holy Spirit affects the believer’s relationship with God, others, and self. As Christians grow in their relationship with the Lord, they develop unselfish love, true joy, and lasting peace. While the fruit of the Holy Spirit is not necessary for salvation, these godly virtues are evidence of salvation and the genuine work of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 7:17). Followers of Christ not only receive the blessings of God but also reflect His character to all whom they encounter. Article drawn from study features in the NIV Woman’s Study Bible.