Is Christ Divided?

Now this I mean, that each one of you saith, “I am of Paul”; and “I of Apollos”; and “I of Cephas”; and “I of Christ”.
Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized into the name of Paul? (1 Corinthians 1:12-13).

If things got much worse in Corinth there might well have been the Pauline Church, the Apollonic Church, the Petrine Church, and the church of Christ, as opposed to just the singular “Church of God” (1 Corinthians 1:2).

Even though many issues were problematic in Corinth Paul begins with what he had heard from Chloe’s people: the Corinthians were contending amongst themselves and lines were being drawn around various people: Paul, Apollos, Cephas/Peter, and Christ (1 Corinthians 1:11-12). Paul will address this issue in various ways from 1 Corinthians 1:10 until 1 Corinthians 4:21, attempting to emphasize that God is the one who deserves all the glory, that such divisiveness exposes a carnal/fleshly mentality incompatible with the spiritual wisdom of Christ in the Gospel; these growing divisions indicate jealousy and strife, works of the flesh, walking after the manner of men, and not after Christ (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:1-4). The church is God’s building, God’s temple; it is not for man to divide, but, as Paul says, for all to speak the same thing in subjection to Christ (1 Corinthians 1:10, 3:9).

The New Testament is full of warnings about what would happen in the future with many false teachers attempting to lead Christians astray (e.g. Acts 20:18-35, 1 Timothy 4:1-3); while such false teachers existed even in New Testament times, by the end of the first century local churches still maintained the pattern of organization they received from the Apostles and recognized each other as fellow churches seeking to glorify the Lord and hold firm to the faith as delivered by the Apostles (Jude 1:3, Revelation 2:1-3:21). Churches in different towns were not different denominations but local congregation of the Lord’s people in different areas. Nevertheless, we do see the principle of denominationalism strongly condemned here in 1 Corinthians 1:10-13. Paul did not want to see Christians drawing lines against each other on the basis of their favorite preacher; if there were a “Pauline Church” and a “Petrine Church” in Corinth it would be a failure of God’s purposes for unity, not merely in pretense, but in substance: to have the same mind and same judgment (1 Corinthians 1:11). There may not be the “Pauline Church” and the “Petrine Church,” but there are the Lutheran Churches, Mennonite Churches, and the Wesleyan Churches, named after the men whose preaching or teaching influenced those who would follow them. Other churches are denominated by their pretense toward universalism or correctness (Catholicism, Orthodoxy), by church polity (Presbyterians, Congregationalists), or by geographical origins (Anglicans). While many such groups have come to understand the need for unity based in John 17:20-23 none have yet proven willing to uphold Paul’s standard in 1 Corinthians 1:10 to not be divided by party or names of past preachers but instead to be of the same mind and judgment, to be part of the Temple of God, His one church, where Christians work together according to the truth of the Gospel to advance His purposes. In the end, if Paul chastised the Corinthians for their jealousy and strife manifest in following particular preachers, how can such practices and denominations be justified today?

Such “cults of personality”, jealousy, and strife are not limited to “those denominations.” Many more are recognizing that the divided heritage of Christendom is an embarrassment to Christ and the faith, the opposite of the unification of mankind in His blood as was God’s eternal plan (John 17:20-23, Ephesians 2:1-18, 3:10-11). Yet even then many will follow a particular preacher. Among churches of Christ many have spoken strongly against denominationalism and for unity in the Lord’s church in the truth yet delineated themselves along the lines of various publications or movements or trends. In the end “I follow this paper” or “I follow this school” is no better than “I follow Peter” or “I follow Luther”; they are all evidence of division and strife in the church which ought not be!

It is interesting, however, that Paul includes among the various “divisions” or “sects” those who say “I follow Christ.” Some have speculated that these last people were the ones who truly understood God’s purposes, yet the text provides no such indication. Paul identifies these four as the various “sects” developing in Corinth (Paul, Apollos, Cephas, Christ), and then immediately asks, “is Christ divided” (1 Corinthians 1:12-13a)?

One can imagine what those of the “Christ-sect” were thinking as the letter was read aloud. They, after all, could give all the “right” answers. “Was Paul crucified for you” (1 Corinthians 1:13)? No, of course not; neither were Cephas or Apollos. But Christ was (1 Corinthians 1:23). “Were ye baptized into the name of Paul” (1 Corinthians 1:13)? No, nor into Cephas or Apollos, but they were all baptized into Christ (1 Corinthians 1:14-15, Galatians 3:27). So the “Christ-sect” had all the right answers. So how could they be condemned?

The problem is not their answers; the problem is not really in being “of Christ.” The problem is the jealousy, strife, and contention for which Paul chastises all the Corinthians (1 Corinthians 1:11, 3:1-4). The sectarian mindset and attitude is the problem: you can have the “right name” and the “right answers” but maintain the wrong attitude.

This is an important warning for members of churches of Christ. We do well to seek to be of the same mind and the same judgment, one in the faith in the truth as Paul exhorts in 1 Corinthians 1:10. Yet the danger of denominating remains ever present, to consider oneself “Church of Christ” as another considers himself a “Baptist” or another a “Lutheran.” If, in the end, the Restoration Movement simply created new denominations, then its energizing spirit has failed and proved a lie. If the Restoration Movement has merely spawned some new denominations it proves little better than that against which it arose.

At its best the Restoration Movement emphasized both unity and truth. Truth without unity is sectarianism headed toward Pharisaism and even Gnosticism, the “enlightened” clearly superior to the “ignorant” masses. Unity without truth is what we can find in the modern ecumenical movement, an attempt to declare victory in failure, seeking to affirm all they agree upon while dismissing the very real remaining divisions as irrelevant, and the goal of 1 Corinthians 1:10 as stated to be a pipe dream. Meanwhile Jesus is the truth and has prayed for unity among those in the truth (John 14:6, 17:20-23). Christians do well to call themselves Christians or believers and to speak of churches in ways seen in the New Testament, honoring God in Christ and not named after men or church polity. Christians do well to follow God according to the New Testament and not the creeds and cults of personality of men as Paul well describes in 1 Corinthians 1:10-4:21. Yet it must always be remembered that sectarianism is a work of the flesh; all division is the result of jealousy and strife, and for good reason all three are reckoned as works of the flesh (Galatians 5:19-21). When such things take place it hardly matters who is “right” and who is “wrong” doctrinally; the division is wrong, the sectarianism is wrong, and we must do all we can to encourage all who believe in Christ to fully reflect the unity He desires, not merely in pretense, but in truth, having the same mind and judgment, one in Christ. Let us be one as God is one and thus testify to His great power!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Surrender

Know ye not, that to whom ye present yourselves as servants unto obedience, his servants ye are whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But thanks be to God, that, whereas ye were servants of sin, ye became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching whereunto ye were delivered; and being made free from sin, ye became servants of righteousness (Romans 6:16-18).

“Slave” is not exactly the type of job to which many people would aspire.

The ancient world was supported and made possible by slaves. Slaves worked fields, quarried mines, educated children, cleaned clothes and dishes, prepared food, and an innumerable host of other tasks. Their hard work allowed their masters to enjoy the leisure time they expended in noble and less than noble pursuits: philosophy, politics, scientific exploration, symposia, debauchery, etc. While the Roman system of slavery was not nearly as brutal as that of the American South from the 1600s until the 1800s, the life of the slave was still not very pleasant. They were property, supposed to be invisible, always serving at the behest of their master. Some would gain their freedom; many others would not.

Slaves had no social clout and little standing; people did not voluntarily sign up to become slaves. We can only imagine how astonishing and controversial the message of Jesus of Nazareth and His Kingdom would have sounded to ancient ears when He affirmed the value of serving others and being as a slave (Matthew 20:25-28). It would have seemed quite strange to many to hear many of the great Apostles call themselves the slaves of Jesus (e.g. Paul in Romans 1:1, Peter in 2 Peter 1:1). Who would voluntarily decide to consider themselves a slave to anyone?

As Paul is attempting to explain how Christians are not under law but under grace he speaks of how Christians are “servants” (Greek douloi, properly “slaves”) to whomever they obey (Romans 6:16-18). In such a view everyone is a slave; true freedom is illusory. The only question involves precisely whom one will serve. Paul frames the experience of coming to the understanding of Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, repentance, and the conversion process in general as making the choice to no longer serve sin unto death and condemnation but to serve righteousness in obedience according to the standard of teaching to which Christians have been committed, that is, the Gospel of Christ. Paul does not deny that a free will choice was involved; believers choose to serve righteousness and not sin. Nevertheless the choice was rather circumscribed: continue to serve sin in whatever guise you want to call it, be it idols, self, lusts, etc., or serve God in Christ. With such a perspective we better understand why it would be that early Christians called themselves slaves of Jesus; far better to be a slave of Jesus than to be a slave to the ways of the world!

It is also interesting to note how the Romans obtained their slaves. Some slaves were born into slavery. Others entered slavery on account of debt. Yet the Romans obtained a large number of their slaves from their conquests in war. The people who did not die but who surrendered to the Roman forces would become the next generation of Roman slaves.

“Surrender” is a term we do not find explicitly in Scripture; nevertheless, the concept is of great importance. To surrender is to give up; it is generally understood either to give up oneself in war when one can no longer stand their ground and fight or in terms of having to give up possessions to another for some reason. In terms of the Christian faith surrender is the necessary means by which one puts oneself in subjection to or to submit to the proper authorities; one must “give up” one’s right of self-determination in some way so as to follow the orders of the one in authority. In Scripture everyone is to be subject to God and the government which is given its authority by God (Romans 13:1). Christians are to be subject to one another (Ephesians 5:21). Wives are to submit to their husbands as the church submits to Christ (Ephesians 5:22-24). Children ought to submit to their parents in the Lord (Ephesians 6:1-3). Members of the local church ought to submit to the eldership when present (Hebrews 13:17). In all of these situations and relationships real submission or subjection cannot take place until the person proves willing to surrender to the will of the proper authority.

Surrendering is one of the most difficult things any of us can do; whether we want to admit it or not, we like to maintain the (often little) power we think we have. Throughout time people have not thought highly of those who surrender; in some cultures it was considered so shameful that soldiers would rather commit suicide rather than to return to their people after having surrendered. We like thinking of ourselves as being in control and doing well; especially in America “giving up” seems to be the worst possible thing one could do.

Yet let us consider surrender in light of Romans 6:16-18. Just as we are all slaves to something, whether we admit it or not, we also surrender to something. We always “give up” or “give into” something. It may be the ways of the world as communicated in society, culture, family, education, etc. It may be one’s overvalued view of self. It may just be a constant giving into one’s desires. Yet in all those ways a person is surrendering, giving into the forces at work around them. The only other way is to surrender one’s will to God so as to serve Him in Christ!

We are to consider ourselves as slaves of God in Christ, seeking to be obedient from the heart to the Gospel (Romans 6:16-18). In order to be those slaves of God we must surrender our will to Him. It may seem scary and an admission of weakness; such is why we must always remember that God is faithful and worthy of our trust and that His power is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 5:7, 12:9). We should also recognize that not surrendering is not an option: if we do not surrender to God and His ways in Christ, then we are surrendering to the forces of darkness in whatever guise they have taken, be it ourselves, our culture, our education, our lusts, etc. Let us therefore prove willing to surrender our minds, hearts, bodies, souls, and will to God in Christ, trust in Him, obey Him, and advance His purposes to His honor and glory!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Doing Righteousness

Whosoever is begotten of God doeth no sin, because his seed abideth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is begotten of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother (1 John 3:9-10).

Righteousness and sin are always at odds. You cannot hold to one and court the other; you cannot be fully devoted to one while having affection for the other. John wants his fellow Christians to be very clear on this.

The context of 1 John 3:1-10 is the same as that of 1 John 2:18-29: John is greatly concerned about the “antichrists” who would lead Christians astray. John sets out boundary markers to both assure Christians of their standing before God while making sharp and stark distinctions between them and their opponents. The impetus in 1 John 2:18-27 involved doctrines and teachings: Christians could have assurance in their standing before God by holding firm to the message they heard from the beginning and remaining strong in the instruction provided through the Spirit. Those who confessed the truth of God in Christ as revealed to the Apostles by the Spirit from the beginning remained in God in Christ; those who denied Jesus as the Incarnate Christ, the Son of God, were antichrists (1 John 2:18-24).

John does begin a slight shift in 1 John 2:29 that informs 1 John 3:1-10: doctrine is one means by which one can have either assurance or warning, but the practice of righteousness is another such marker. John fleshes this out in 1 John 3:1-10, particularly in 1 John 3:4-10. Those who sin do lawlessness, and Jesus became flesh in order to take away such sin, and in Him there was no sin (1 John 3:4-5). The contrast is set: those who are in Christ and begotten of God do not sin but do righteousness, and those who do not know God in Christ but are of the devil persist in sin and do not love their brethren (1 John 3:4-10).

John speaks in very black and white terms; unsurprisingly, many have taken his messages out of context, interpreting them in the most absolute terms, and have caused confusion, disharmony, and inserted contradiction into Scripture by so doing. One who has read all of 1 John until this point can see the tension and challenge inherent in John’s strong language: did John not say in 1 John 1:8 that those who say they (presently) have no sin deceive themselves, and the truth is not in them? Did he not speak of the need for confession of sin in 1 John 1:9? What of 1 John 2:1, where “if we sin” we have an advocate before the Father in Jesus Christ the righteous? How can John in one verse allow for the possibility of Christians sinning, or declaring that Christians presently struggle with sin, and yet a few verses later say that true Christians will not sin at all?

We can make sense of what John says first by considering those against whom he speaks and then by considering what he might mean by his language. Those whom John characterizes as “antichrists” are at least docetists if not incipient Gnostics. Docetists believed that Jesus was not actually human but only seemed to be human (from Greek dokeo, “to seem”). In their view, God would never humiliate Himself to the point of taking on flesh; to accept such a view would deny the incarnation, the crucifixion, and the resurrection (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:12-20), and such is why John denounces this view with such force in 1 John 2:18-3:10. Perhaps their docetism was part of incipient Gnosticism, a view which would become popular in later centuries. The Gnostics were docetic and believed they had special, secret knowledge of the “story within the story” in the Bible. In either case, many times adherents of such views would either start out in Christianity and depart from it or would visit Christian assemblies, perhaps attempt to join with the Christians, and seem to be one of the Christians, but only in order to get a chance to speak privately with individual Christians in an attempt to lead them astray from the faith (cf. 1 John 2:19, 26). Such is why John emphasizes the need to hold to the message Christians heard from the beginning (1 John 2:24), but it also is why John must emphasize righteousness (1 John 2:29-3:10). Throughout the New Testament, one consistent condemnation of false teachers involves their attempt to satisfy desires of the flesh through the proclamation and substance of their messages (Philippians 3:18-19, 1 Timothy 6:3-6, Titus 1:10-14, 2 Peter 2:1-20, Jude 1:3-16). Whereas Jesus in His life and death practiced and exhorted toward righteousness, and the Apostles sought to proclaim and practice righteousness, these antichrists would use their proclamations and practice to practice greed, sexual immorality, and a host of other sins, and justified themselves on account of the fact that the flesh was irrelevant, to be destroyed in death, and the spiritual realm was all that was important. Little wonder then why John emphasized the resurrection of life as the foundation of hope that leads to purity and holiness in 1 John 3:2-3: when you understand that God is about redemption and reconciliation, you will seek to be pure and holy even in the flesh so as to be like Him. In terms of the language used, some modern versions do well to flesh out what John means by “doeth sin”: “making a practice of sinning.” The difference is not between people who never sin versus sin a little or a lot; the contrast is between those who continually or repeatedly sin versus those who do not have such a practice. In so doing we can reconcile 1 John 3:9-10 with 1 John 1:8-9, 2:1: Christians are not to continue in unrepentant sin and must not make sin a habit, but when they stumble in their walk with Christ, they can confess that stumble and be forgiven so as to continue to pursue righteousness in Christ.

Even though we must resist making John’s language absolute, we still must come to grips with the force of his words in terms of our lives as Christians. John is sharply and starkly re-stating Jesus’ principle regarding false teachers in Matthew 7:15-20: by their fruits you shall know them. If doctrines lead to righteousness, they likely are true (although even in this case we must be hesitant to speak in absolute terms, for many people do a lot of righteous things yet believe very different things about the nature of God in Christ). But if the people who promote a teaching persist in sin, or the doctrines themselves justify persistence in sin, then they are clearly false and of the Evil One. It is easy to always project this concern onto others; after all, we believe we teach the truth and are in the right, yet who would ever honestly claim to be a false teacher? We must first consider ourselves: do people know we are Christians by how we speak and act? Are we producing the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-24)? We may intend to practice righteousness, and that intention may be well and good, but a big difference remains between intending to do righteousness yet persisting in sin and actually doing righteousness and thus avoiding sin. We might attempt to take solace in the idea that we have the true teachings, but John’s words should expose that assurance as a lie: it has never been enough to just know the truth, but it must be practiced. To not practice the truth you know is sin (James 4:17); you have no excuse. We know we are children of God when we do the things we know are true!

Many good-hearted, sincere, and conscientious Christians read 1 John 3:9-10 and are pricked in heart, concerned they may not be good enough to be the children of God. Such people most likely have the least to fear; a heart so tender to God’s message remains open to all He says and seeks to accomplish them. We must remember that John writes these things to assure Christians that they remain in Christ when they hold to the Gospel as proclaimed from the beginning and practice righteousness, not to upset their faith. Yet we must be doing righteousness; just knowing it is never enough. Let us demonstrate that we are born of God by practicing righteousness, assured that we will be known by God, Jesus, and those around us by the fruit expressed in our words and deeds!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Shutdown

For our citizenship is in heaven; whence also we wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ (Philippians 3:20).

Early in the morning on 01 October 2013, all non-essential functions of the United States government shut down after no agreement could be made in Congress to continue to fund the government’s operations. Yet another showdown regarding the “debt ceiling” loomed large at the time as well, possibly putting the “full faith and credit” of the United States government at risk. Many people will lose income; many tasks will be left undone. Politicians, pundits, and American citizens argue and debate regarding the process, nature, and wisdom of these events and are concerned about the future.

This particular episode highlights the challenges that come with earthly government. All of us find ourselves as citizens of some earthly government or another; Paul used his privileges as a Roman citizen to his advantage in proclaiming the Gospel (Acts 21:39-40, 22:23-30). Christians have an obligation to honor and respect earthly governments and their officers, obeying all regulations consistent with the purposes of God, and paying appropriate taxes (Romans 13:1-7, 1 Peter 2:13-17). Therefore, worldly government has its God-given purpose on earth, and we do well to respect that. Nevertheless, for generations, people have put too much confidence and emphasis on government, for good and for ill. The Israelites during the Second Temple period experienced persecution and oppression by pagan governments, but their solution always seemed to involve a Jewish government that would prove equally ruthless against the pagans. In various ways some have looked to earthly rulers to promote and maintain Christianity, from Constantine to almost the present day, leading to the Crusades and the Inquisition. Others are convinced that the Gospel should be advanced through government legislation, as if people will follow after God if the state requires it. Far too many expend a lot of time and energy into politics and political causes, imagining that they will find fulfillment in life by advancing some cause, however truly noble or ignoble, through political channels. For many the ultimate goal is the imposition of their particular views on politics and government to prevail at the expense of others; if they accomplish that, they will be satisfied.

Yet there is one trend that always proves true about any sort of human organization, be it government, corporations, non-profit organizations, and so on: they never can fully deliver on what is promised. They are filled with fallible people who often make mistakes; many are corrupted by the lust for power and money and serve themselves and their associates rather than seeking the welfare of all of their people. Even if one can find good rulers making good laws and seeking the welfare of their people, there is no guarantee that it will last: the next generation of leadership might prove corrupt. One legislator’s life work could be undone quickly by others in the future! Furthermore, in order to make everyone happy, decisions are made that most often make no one happy. Politics demands compromise; no one ever gets all of what they want; it gets messy and complicated, just as the shutdown illustrates. As human endeavors they can lead to some good but never can achieve the ultimate good. We were never supposed to put our faith in them as our saviors and redeemers (Psalms 20:7, 146:3).

In Jesus of Nazareth God invites us to find a higher calling and better citizenship, as Paul indicates in Philippians 3:20. Early Christians suffered all sorts of indignities, even unto death, because they declared that Jesus was truly the Lord, the Savior, the Son of God, and not Caesar (Revelation 13:1-10). On account of His death, resurrection, and ascension, God gave Jesus a Kingdom that would never end, and He would rule in righteousness, mercy, and justice (Daniel 2:44, 7:13-14, Revelation 19:11). Through the proclamation of Jesus’ life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and ultimate return, the good news of the Gospel, all men and women are invited to submit to the lordship of Jesus the Christ, the King, and serve Him in His Kingdom, manifest on earth as His church, the congregation of the people of God, and obtain rescue and redemption from sin, death, and all evil (Acts 2:14-41, Romans 1:16, 8:1-15, 1 Corinthians 15:3-8, Colossians 1:13, 18). We have every reason for confidence in the Lord Jesus and in our service to Him; He has not failed in His promises and will not fail us. If we put His Kingdom and righteousness first, and serve Him, we build up treasure in Heaven (Matthew 6:19-34). It will not fade away or decay. It will not be corrupted by a later generation. It will not suffer a shutdown. It will continue to exist and accomplish the purposes of God who established it. And Jesus will gain the ultimate victory over sin, death, and evil, and all who are His will share in glory forevermore (Revelation 19:1-22:6)!

The United States government might experience a shutdown, but the Kingdom of God in Christ will never shut down. Jesus has shut down the powers of sin and death through His death and resurrection, and on the final day, all of the evil powers will find themselves shut down and condemned (Romans 8:1-23, Revelation 19:1-20:15). On that day Christians will experience glory beyond comprehension, and all their confidence in the Lord Jesus will be more than justified (Romans 8:17-18, Revelation 21:1-22:6). God’s power to save comes through the good news of the life, death, resurrection, ascension, lordship, and return of the Lord Jesus Christ, not by the sword or by gun or by legislation or a non-profit organization or any other such thing. Let us put our trust in God in Christ, become citizens of the heavenly Kingdom, and in all service await the return of our Savior on the final day!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Seeking Safe Dwellings

And my people shall abide in a peaceable habitation, and in safe dwellings, and in quiet resting-places (Isaiah 32:18).

In times of distress and turbulence, “normal stability” seems like paradise.

The prophet Isaiah spoke to Israel at the end of the good times and in times of great terror. Israel trusted in her prosperity and in her nimble foreign policy maneuvers yet would soon find out there was no security in them. Before Isaiah’s time was done Israel would experience the full terror of Assyria; the Kingdom of Israel would be no more, and the Kingdom of Judah was humiliated, impoverished, and broken (cf. 2 Kings 17:1-19:37, Isaiah 1:1-9). Furthermore, the time for Judah was short; the Babylonian menace loomed large in the future as Isaiah saw it (cf. Isaiah 39:1-8). Safety proved to be an illusion.

It is this future devastation which Isaiah seems to envision in Isaiah 32:9-14. He speaks to women who are at ease in Judah: they are complacent and ought to repent in light of what will take place (Isaiah 32:9). Isaiah envisions the failure of harvests, an empty palace, cities overrun with animals and weeds, no doubt the result of pestilence, famine, violence, and exile (Isaiah 32:10-14). Everything which seemed stable would fall apart; in the chaos, a return to what was expected as “normal” would seem great!

Yet that is precisely the problem: the Israelites, particularly the wealthy among them, have taken their stability and safety for granted, and have believed that it has come as a result of their own devices. Isaiah provides no message to encourage such a view. In the cutthroat ancient Near Eastern world, safety and security could not come from chariot, sword, gold, silver, or power. They all would fail over time.

Isaiah does speak of a time when stability, safety, and peace will return, and does so in a picturesque and ideal way for all times: the desert becomes fruitful, justice and righteousness abide in the land, all live in peace and confidence, with safe and quiet houses (Isaiah 32:15-18). Yet this does not come because of Israel and anything she has done but because God has poured out His Spirit upon His people (Isaiah 32:15).

Isaiah’s message did not receive much of a hearing while Israel remained prosperous. Yet after the devastation and terrors came to pass, later generations took comfort in the hope of Isaiah’s prophecies. They yearned for the security and stability they did not enjoy in their day. They looked forward to when God would pour out His Spirit and this security would be present.

We find the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy in Jesus of Nazareth and His Kingdom. God has poured out His Spirit upon His people (Acts 2:1-41). Yet if we look for the prosperity and security on a physical level, we look in vain, for the promise is for spiritual prosperity and security. In Christ all spiritual riches and blessings are poured out (Ephesians 1:3); in Christ we find true security and refuge (Hebrews 6:18). In Christ we have a great treasure ensured for us for eternity (1 Peter 1:3-9)!

We can therefore find a safe dwelling in God in Christ and among His people (cf. 1 Corinthians 3:14-16, 6:19-20, 1 Peter 2:3-5). Yet we do well to heed the warning provided by the example of Israel in the days of Isaiah: safety will not be found in this world among the tools of this world. We are not guaranteed material prosperity and comfort. In this world we will find danger, distress, trial, and tribulation (Acts 14:21, 2 Timothy 3:12). God has not sent His Son to help us escape the problems of life but to provide us strength so as to endure them (cf. Ephesians 3:17-21, 6:10-18). We may be fortunate enough to find a nice piece of property with a nice house in a nice community with nice neighbors with nice services and a clean, safe, sanitized environment, but we should never confuse that with normalcy or how Christianity ought to be. If our lives are going well and we have relatively safe dwellings, we should be thankful but not complacent, aware that earthly stability may vanish, but Jesus will remain. Days may come when we find ourselves in great distress or trial and we will discover, as Israel did before us, that confidence in earthly forms of stability may fail, and that true security can only be found through God and His loving-kindness.

The desert is now fruitful; righteousness now exists in the Kingdom of God; safe dwellings can be found. We will not find them from the military or the government but only through dwelling in God through His Son in the Spirit. Prosperity, righteousness, and stability do not demand the American dream but instead through quiet confidence in God’s strength unto endurance, humbly living as a faithful servant in the Kingdom of the Lord Jesus, suffering the loss of all things for Him for His eternal glory. Let us not seek safety in the world but through trusting in the Lord Jesus!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The Good Confession

Fight the good fight of the faith, lay hold on the life eternal, whereunto thou wast called, and didst confess the good confession in the sight of many witnesses. I charge thee in the sight of God, who giveth life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession; that thou keep the commandment, without spot, without reproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 6:12-14).

Confession is one of those concepts that many people think they understand but often miss different aspects of what is involved. Most of the time, when we think of confession, we think of someone making known their transgressions. We might imagine a criminal confessing his crimes before a police officer or judge, or a person declaring their sins before God.

The Greek word for “confession” is homologeo; its parts literally mean “to speak the same thing (as),” and thus a confession or profession. It is used in passages like 1 John 1:9 to describe confession of sin, but it also maintains another powerful meaning in the New Testament, as we see in 1 Timothy 6:12-14: the “good confession” of Jesus and Timothy.

What is the “good confession” of which Paul speaks? In the Gospel accounts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus does not say much to Pilate, save “Thou sayest” as a response to the question of whether He was the King of the Jews (Matthew 27:11/Mark 15:2/Luke 23:3). Jesus’ statement is not meant as disrespect; in Greek a statement and a question feature most of the same words with vocal inflection marking the difference between the two. Jesus declares the substance of Pilate’s words to be true.

John reveals a more substantive conversation between Pilate and Jesus. In John’s account Jesus declares that He has a kingdom, and it is not of this world (John 18:36); He is a King, and He has come to bear witness to the truth (John 18:37). In any event, Pilate’s inscription placed above Jesus, declaring Him the King of the Jews, makes it clear that there was little ambiguity involved (John 19:19). Before Pilate Jesus declared that He was a King, the King of the Jews; to any observant Jew, this meant that before the Roman authorities Jesus claimed to be the descendant of David, the Anointed One, the Messiah, the Christ.

Therefore, Jesus as the Messiah is the good confession which Jesus made before Pilate. Early Christians insisted on every believer making a similar confession before others: many ancient versions record the Ethiopian eunuch doing so (Acts 8:37), Paul speaks about it to the Romans (Romans 10:9-10), the Hebrew author has something similar in mind (Hebrews 3:1, 4:14, 10:23), and Paul here speaks of Timothy’s confession (1 Timothy 6:12-14). As Jesus confessed His identity before Pilate, so believers are to confess Jesus’ identity before others as well.

This confession is not the confession of sin or that one is a sinner; this is “speaking the same thing” as Jesus before Pilate, that He is the Christ, the Son of God (cf. Matthew 16:16). As Jesus spoke His confession before Pilate, so we are to speak our confession before others.

Today this does not seem very controversial or challenging for most people; very few of us have endangered ourselves to any degree by declaring that Jesus is the Christ, especially when doing so before other Christians. Nevertheless, in the first days of Christianity, as well as in some places around the globe to this very day, to declare Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, could easily lead to arrest, torture, and death. For generations many Christians have bravely declared Jesus’ Lordship in the face of oppression and tyranny to the point of death. We should all maintain that level of boldness in faith if we are called upon to do so (cf. 1 John 3:16).

Yet it is evident from what Paul is saying– as well as the Hebrew author’s use of the idea of confession– that there is more to this than merely declaring before other Christians that Jesus is Lord. The expectation is for all of us that what we declare orally we believe firmly in our hearts and minds. All we may say in our confession is, “I believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” Yet how much is really said in such a confession! If we believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, such demands that we trust in Jesus as Christ. It demands that we adhere to the teachings of Christ of which we learn in Scripture from the Apostles. This adherence to the teaching is not merely an intellectual exercise; it must be practiced, observable by all.

We have good reason to believe that Timothy’s confession took place over twenty years before Paul discusses it in 1 Timothy; a similar period of time (or perhaps even longer) is true for the Hebrew Christians to whom the Hebrew author writes. Their confession was something they were expected to remember; it was part of the moment in which they committed to the cause of Christ. Timothy declared before others that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; it is right for Paul to remind him of that declaration in terms of encouraging him to fight the good fight of faith, to hold firm to the commandment, and to continue to take hold of eternal life.

Merely declaring Jesus as the Christ means precious little, as Matthew 7:21-23 and James 2:19 attest. Instead, we must make the good confession of Jesus as Christ as a statement of confidence and trust, one whose implications we seek to work out throughout the rest of our lives. By confessing Jesus as the Christ, we confess our allegiance to Him and to His standard; by confessing Jesus as the Christ, we confess that we seek to be Christians striving to fight the good fight of faith, keeping His commandments, seeking to lay hold of eternal life. The good confession is as much a call to action and rallying cry as much as the declaration of Jesus’ identity. Let us make the good confession and make good on that confession throughout our lives!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Abiding in the Teaching of Christ

Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son (2 John 1:9).

Whereas the essential human condition and challenges remain consistent throughout time, many things have changed over the past two thousand years. Empires have come and gone; the Gospel message has spread throughout the world; people who believe in Jesus today often come from very different places and cultures than that of first century Jewish Palestine. Different people with different societal and cultural norms have looked at Jesus for the past two thousand years, and unsurprisingly, we now have all sorts of different views about who Jesus really is and for what Jesus stood.

Yet this is not a new challenge. Within a hundred years of Jesus’ death, many of the Greco-Roman world, profoundly influenced by Greek philosophy, also looked into the claims and life of Jesus of Nazareth. They found Him compelling, but there were certain things that the Christians were saying about Jesus unacceptable to them. The Christians claimed that Jesus was the Son of God and God the Son (Acts 8:37, John 1:1); well and good, but they also claimed that He was God the Son in the flesh (Colossians 2:9, 2 John 1:7). Surely God would never humiliate Himself to the point of becoming flesh. No; it was not truly flesh; He only seemed to be flesh, these Greeks would say.

These Greeks influenced by Jesus but still holding onto many Greek philosophical principles were forming the various groups called the Gnostics; many of the “gospels” that are promoted with great fanfare today, like the “Gospel of Thomas” and the “Gospel of Judas,” were written by these Gnostics. They viewed Jesus as a most superior teacher of philosophy, a divine being who only seemed to be human, advocating (depending on the group) either complete asceticism or license to satisfy the desires of the flesh in the name of superior understanding and a complete division between the flesh and the spirit, among other things. Sure, there were a couple of similarities between the picture of Jesus promoted by the Gnostics with the picture of Jesus promoted by the Apostles and the early Christians, yet the differences remained stark.

What did all of this mean? A lot of people today think that different views of Jesus can be maintained acceptably before God, but such was unthinkable in the first century. John perceives the threat Gnosticism poses to the work and identity of Jesus of Nazareth: the power of the Incarnation is denied, the ability of Jesus to identify with humans and their suffering is rejected (cf. Hebrews 4:15, 5:7-8), and the Biblical presentation of man as body and soul combined is being thoroughly undermined (cf. Genesis 1:26-27, 2:5-9). The differences between the Apostolic presentation of Jesus of Nazareth and the Gnostic presentation are real, and critical aspects of the faith are rejected by even tolerating the Gnostic view. John will have none of it: those who do not abide in the teaching, or doctrine, of Christ, do not have God; those who abide in that teaching have the Father and the Son, since the Son is the exact imprint of the nature of the Father (John 10:30, Hebrews 1:3). Those who have left the teaching of Christ engage in evil works, and they are not even to be greeted (2 John 1:10-11).

These are very sharp words, and to many modern ears, it sounds intolerant. His words are designed to be intolerant to a significant degree, mostly because of his desire to maintain the integrity of the teachings regarding Jesus. It is one thing to believe the principles of Greek philosophy; it is quite another to attempt to re-imagine Jesus as a Greek philosopher and in the process distort His message and His identity. None of us were given the right to make a Jesus of our own image according to our own desire; therefore, it is right to defend the teaching of the Christ who actually lived, died, and was raised (1 Peter 3:15).

To understand the true nature of the Christ is always a challenge. We are all creatures of our time and age; we are programmed by our environment, family, friends, culture, and society to think in certain ways and to accept certain propositions as true. None of us can completely transcend those ways of thinking; in various ways, we will all see Jesus somehow in ways more like us than like a first century Palestinian Jew. Since Jesus is for all men, this is acceptable up to a point; Jesus is compelling precisely because He speaks regarding the human condition in general, and not merely to first century Jewish concerns (e.g. Matthew 5-7). That is likely why John emphasizes the need to abide in the teachings of Christ: we did not walk with Him and talk with Him, but we all can learn the things He taught and the things taught regarding who He was and is and ever will be (cf. 2 Timothy 2:2).

The challenge is for us as much as it was for those in the first century: we must abide in the teachings of Jesus. Some of the things Jesus said and did are easily acceptable; those should be a given. Yet in every society and in every age there are aspects to Jesus’ existence, nature, life, death, resurrection, and instruction which stand completely against the commonly accepted wisdom of the day. It is hard to fight against cultural norms; little wonder, then, how so many have not abode in the teachings of Christ, but have instead invented a Jesus better suited to their own desires and more consistent with their own expectations. That tendency has not changed; nevertheless, we must stand against it. We must accept all of the teachings from Jesus and regarding Jesus in Scripture, no matter how consistent they are with what we already believe or how popular they are with our fellow man. Let us strive to abide in the doctrine of Christ and not deviate from Him!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Christ Our Sufficiency

And such confidence have we through Christ to God-ward: not that we are sufficient of ourselves, to account anything as from ourselves; but our sufficiency is from God; who also made us sufficient as ministers of a new covenant (2 Corinthians 3:4-6a).

Few things are as dangerous as when the instrument begins to vaunt itself over its designer and operator.

We see this happen sometimes in the movies. The Terminator series and the Matrix series all presuppose such a situation: humans make computers/robots, computers/robots get too smart, computers/robots try to take over. We have this feeling, deep down, that if our creation to take us over, it would be a very bad thing. We perceive that something is out of place in that condition.

The Apostle Paul understood this danger in his own life as it related to God his Creator and Christ his Savior, and it was a good thing. His ministry featured signs and wonders; many converted to the Lord on at least two continents based on his preaching and teaching. As he writes for at least the second time to the Corinthians, he has spoken of them as a living “letter of Christ,” through Paul’s ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:1-3). In that sense, the Corinthians themselves are commendation for Paul, and in that work he has great confidence (2 Corinthians 4:4).

What would happen if Paul rooted this confidence in what he could perceive in the physical realm? What if Paul thought that it was by his own strength, cunning, and persuasive ability that the Corinthians were converted to Jesus? It would be very tempting; it would satisfy the natural conceit that dwells within us all. He could feel quite important, vaunting in his position. In short, his pride could quickly undo all the work that had been done!

And that is why Paul hastens to declare that whereas the conversion of the Corinthians is his confidence in Christ toward God, it was not from his own strength or power; indeed, he declares that he has no sufficiency in himself (2 Corinthians 3:4-5). His sufficiency is from God; God is the one who made him sufficient to minister in this new covenant through Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 3:5-6). Paul recognizes that he is the instrument; God is the power and provides what is sufficient to accomplish His purpose (cf. 2 Corinthians 4:7).

Paul’s declarations have become controversial since he established them. Some have taken his words to mean that the believer is able to do nothing at all, becoming entirely passive agents of God. Others, in seeking to avoid this extreme, go the other way, and over-emphasize the free will of mankind and come dangerously close to declaring their own sufficiency, albeit in a limited frame. What, then, are we to understand from what Paul has declared here?

We can all confess as true that everything we have and are come from God; we did not create the universe, we did not give ourselves life, and we did not make this creation for our use (cf. Genesis 1:1-2:3, Acts 17:24-29). Beyond that, since we have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, there was nothing we could do in order to save ourselves; God did what we could not do in reconciling us back to Him through Jesus His Son (Romans 3:20-23, 5:6-11, 8:1-3). Therefore, every spiritual blessing comes from God through Christ, and we do not deserve them (Ephesians 1:3).

And yet God expects people to serve Him in Christ, to seek after His will (Romans 6:16-23, Philippians 2:12, 2 Peter 1:3-11). This cannot be forced, for that is not the way of love (John 3:16, 1 Corinthians 13:4-8, 1 John 4:8). People must turn from sin and submit themselves to God, seeking His paths, walking as Jesus walked (Galatians 2:20, James 4:7, 1 John 2:6).

But is there any sufficiency in us to accomplish this through our own strength? We still fall short of God’s glory (Romans 3:23); we still are beset by sin (Hebrews 12:1-2, 1 John 1:8); left to our own devices, we still wander off onto the wrong path (Jeremiah 10:23). Therefore, it is good to agree with Paul: as he understood that he did not have any sufficiency in himself, but only received sufficiency through Christ, we are not sufficient in and of ourselves for anything, but must find our sufficiency through Christ.

That is why the concept of the believer as servant is so consistently maintained throughout Scripture (Luke 17:7-10, Romans 6:16-23, etc.). The slave does all things at the behest of his Master. Another image that indicates as much is that of the instrument (Acts 9:15, Romans 6:13): the tool may accomplish a given work, but only because it has been directed by the One wielding the tool.

So we ought to understand ourselves. Do we work and labor for the Lord? Absolutely. But do we labor by our own sufficiency? Our “sufficiency” always proves insufficient in every respect. Instead, Christ must be our sufficiency. We must do all things according to His direction (Colossians 3:17); we must be strengthened with the strength that comes through Him (Ephesians 3:16-17, Philippians 4:13). Our thoughts, feelings, and actions– our entire being– must be laid at His feet for use to advance His purposes (Galatians 2:20, 2 Corinthians 4:7, 10:5, Philippians 4:8). We may have confidence in Christ toward God for what is accomplished for His purposes through us, but it is no reason for us to glory in ourselves– all praise, honor, and glory are to go to God in Christ, because He is our sufficiency! Let us serve the Lord and use our energies toward His purposes; let us be His instruments to be directed according to His good purpose!

Ethan R. Longhenry

The Messiah: King and Priest

The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent: “Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek” (Psalm 110:4).

It is important for us to remember that while “Jesus Christ” is used as a name today, it was not always so. His name was Jesus. His title, or His office, is that of Christ– the Messiah. Both words (“Christ” is Greek; “Messiah” from the Hebrew) mean “Anointed One.” David was anointed by Samuel as God’s choice for King of Israel (1 Samuel 16:12-13); his promised Descendant would thus also be anointed (Isaiah 61:1, Luke 4:17-21). But Aaron, the High Priest, was also anointed by Moses to reach his office (Exodus 30:30, etc.). The image of the two “anointed ones,” one king, one priest, seems to be behind Zechariah 4:11-14. It also seems to have impacted the author of the Damascus Document, writing within the hundred years before Jesus, who seems to speak of two Messiahs– one of Aaron, one for Israel (CD 9b:10, 29, 15:4, 18:7).

It seems that most Israelites in the first century looked forward to the Messiah who would come as king to defeat the Romans and re-establish the glory and power of Israel. Not a few Israelites also sought some kind of divine reformation and restoration of the priesthood and the Temple, imagined by some as a “Messiah from Aaron.” But there does not seem to be the expectation that the Messiah in the line of David would have the concern for ministry or the priesthood that belonged to the Aaronic line. Furthermore, the Jews had recently experienced the reign of priest-kings with the Hasmoneans– but they certainly were not the fulfillment of the predictions of the prophets, since they were not of David and Judah, but from Aaron and Levi!

Then we come to Jesus of Nazareth. He is without a doubt a descendant of David and Judah according to the flesh (Matthew 1:1-17). The throne of His father David is promised to Him (Luke 1:31-33). But in His life He never raises so much as a finger against Rome and its authority. Instead, He preaches a message of the imminent Kingdom of God and dies on a Roman cross– an event His followers understood as the sacrificial offering for the atonement of sin (Matthew 4:17, 23, Romans 5:6-11, Hebrews 9:1-15). He certainly does not fulfill the expectations of the Jews in terms of the rule of the son of David, but He certainly is engaged in functions of ministry, sacrifice, and atonement, the realm generally reserved for Aaron and his descendants.

This challenge was understood by the author of the letter to the Hebrews. He understood that Jesus was of Judah, a tribe concerning which Moses spoke nothing about the priesthood (Hebrews 7:13-14). But he also understood that the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood was imperfect, offering up animals that could not really atone for sin (Hebrews 7:11, 10:4). Jesus’ sacrifice of Himself, however, was perfect, able to atone for any and all sin, and thus speaks of a better ministry, a better mediation, and thus a better priesthood (Hebrews 7:15-28, 1 Timothy 2:5). But how could Jesus be a priest when He was not from Aaron but from David through Judah?

God’s great plan for salvation was predicted before the events took place, and the Hebrew author highlights a psalm of David to demonstrate how Jesus is a priest– Psalm 110.

That this is a “Messianic” psalm, written by David and inspired by the Spirit is without a doubt; Jesus asks the religious leaders about Psalm 110:1 and how David can say that “YHWH said to my lord…” if the Messiah is David’s son (Matthew 22:41-46/Mark 12:35-37/Luke 20:41-44). And then we have the promise in verse 4: God has sworn, and it will not be revoked– David’s Lord would be a priest forever according to the priesthood of Melchizedek?

Who is Melchizedek? We read of him in Genesis 14:18-20, and the Hebrew author describes him in Hebrews 7:1-10. His name means “King of Righteousness,” and he was king of Salem (“peace”; the city is later named Jerusalem) and priest of God Most High. Abraham gives him a tithe of everything carried back from the victory over the foreign kings, and the Hebrew author points out that thus Levi and the Levites, still in the “loins of Abraham,” gave tithes to Melchizedek. He did not receive his position as priest by genealogy or nepotism, and in him the roles of king and priest were truly intertwined.

Even if the Jews believed that there would have to either be two Messiahs or that the Messiah would focus entirely on his role as King of Israel, David in the Spirit knew better– the Messiah would mean the end of the old system (cf. Hebrews 7:12). The Messiah would be King, yes, but also a priest in the order of Melchizedek. The Messiah would be the King of Righteousness over the City of Peace (cf. Isaiah 61:1-4, Hebrews 12:22-24, Revelation 21:1-22:6). He would accomplish this through His priesthood– the High Priest in the order of Melchizedek, providing Himself as the perfect offering, a ministry in every way superior to what came before (cf. Hebrews 7:11-28).

There would be only one Messiah, and He would provide the satisfaction for everything. Yes, He would reign as King, but only after He accomplished His ministry and His priesthood on the cross. In the resurrection He receives the authority and the throne promised Him, and the message of the prophets is satisfied. Let us praise God for Jesus the Christ, King of Righteousness over the City of Peace, High Priest, our Advocate!

Ethan R. Longhenry

Jesus’ Brothers

For even his brethren did not believe on him (John 7:5).

For many of us, the one refuge we can count on in life is family. Even if everyone else is against us and berates us, we like to think that our family members will still accept us and believe in us.

Yet, on the other hand, our family tends to know us all too well. They watched us grow up and many have rather “incriminating” stories about our pasts. Sometimes family members refuse to see any growth or change in us; in their eyes we are still quite young, quite inexperienced, or quite mischievous, even if we have grown up and have learned our lessons.

Jesus had no ordinary beginning, and while we are not given much information about His early years, we have little doubt that they were not very ordinary, either. Contrary to certain religious traditions, it does not seem as if the household comprised only of Joseph, Mary, and Jesus. We are told that He has brothers and sisters– James, Joseph (or Joses), Simon, and Judas (cf. Matthew 13:55, Mark 6:3).

We do not know much about them. It seems as if they are not terribly much younger than Jesus, since they are old enough to have formed beliefs, and they are known in the community of Nazareth. We can imagine, however, what it might have been like to be the younger brothers of Jesus– the One who always seemed a bit different, One with whom they grew up, but now the One who is making rather grandiose claims about Himself and is engaging in work that is well beyond your average Galilean carpenter!

While there is much we do not know, there is one thing that the Gospels make certain– His brothers do not believe in His claims regarding Himself. In Mark 3:21, Mark informs us that “they who were of” Jesus went to Capernaum to seize Jesus because, in their estimation, He was out of His mind. In John 7:3-5, His brothers are all but taunting Him, challenging Him to go up to Jerusalem and prove to be who He claims to be, for they did not believe in Him. Jesus’ responds in ways likely not much less acerbic, declaring that it is not yet His time, and that while the world cannot hate them, it does hate Him (John 7:6-8). Sibling rivalry indeed!

At first, this might seem incredible to us, and it may lead to some doubt. Jesus suffered temptation, and yet without sin (Hebrews 4:15); wouldn’t His brothers have noticed this in His first thirty-four or so years? Did they not understand how their mother had conceived Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit, and did they not hear about all of the signs that accompanied His birth (Matthew 1-2, Luke 1-2)? How could they not believe in Him?

Yet, when we think about it, we can make some sense of it. There is a reason why it is said that familiarity breeds contempt. With the exception of Jesus at the Temple when He was 12, we do not get the impression that Jesus was active in ministration until His baptism and temptation (cf. Matthew 3-4). If you know Jesus as your older brother who lives in Nazareth of Galilee and who works as a carpenter, perhaps even working together with you in that trade, and then all of a sudden He claims to be the Son of God, abandons the trade for at least a portion of the year, gathers twelve fishermen, zealous, tax collectors, and others around Him, and starts proclaiming this message of the impending Kingdom of God, we can see why they would think Him a little crazy. This is Jesus, from the backwaters of Galilee, the carpenter. Who does He think He is? Why is He doing things that very likely will get Him into trouble, and by extension, His mother and brothers? We can see why Jesus spoke as He did in Matthew 13:57/Mark 6:4: “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own household”!

So Jesus’ brothers did not believe in Him. That was probably not a good testimony for Him, but we get no indication that He compelled or coerced them into believing. They had as much of a chance to share with Him in the work of God as everyone else did (cf. Matthew 12:49-50).

Jesus’ brothers were good Jews, however, and they would have been in Jerusalem for the Passover in that fateful year when their elder Brother would be crucified. And then we learn something extraordinary.

[The eleven] with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers (Acts 1:14).

Wait a second! Here Jesus’ brothers are listed as in prayer with their mother, the other women, and the eleven disciples. Something clearly happened. But what?

The Gospels do not provide direct testimony, but later on, Paul mentions that when Jesus was raised from the dead, He appeared to over five hundred brethren, and then to James (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:3-7). James here is the same James who is listed as Jesus’ brother in Matthew 13:55!

How all of this happened is not detailed precisely. It is entirely possible that Jesus’ brothers came around at some point during His ministry, but there’s no evidence of such. They would have seen Jesus’ trial and crucifixion, and we know that at least James, and likely the rest of His brothers, saw Jesus in the resurrection.

And that is the power of the resurrection– unbelievers are often made believers! James will become a prominent elder in the Jerusalem church and the author of the letter bearing his name; according to Josephus, he is martyred at the hands of the Jews (Acts 15:13, 21:18; Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 20.9). Judas, otherwise known as Jude, is responsible for the letter bearing his name. Both of them refer to themselves as servants of the Lord Jesus Christ (James 1:1, Jude 1:1). Can you imagine? Those who once did not even believe in the claims of their older Brother, who thought Him crazy, now call Him Lord and are willing to be known as slaves of their elder Brother!

Jesus is Lord, and the proof is in the resurrection. Jesus’ resurrection was the difference that changed recalcitrant brothers into willing servants. Has Jesus’ resurrection changed your life? Let us trust Him as Lord and do His will!

Ethan R. Longhenry