Colossians chapter 4

vs 10

Paul wasn't imprisoned alone, which is helpful to remember. I usually imagine him alone in a dungeon type thing.

Mark is Barnabas' cousin! That's another easy thing to forget. We can see here that Mark is to be welcomed. So Paul obviously has positive feelings for Mark.

vs 11

So only 3 jews. That's not many. But Paul finds them comforting. Not sure why. Perhaps he likes the jewness of their attitudes? Or likes the freshness of their outlooks, having all become Christians.

vs 12

Epaphrus may be the one who sparked this letter in the first place, by bringing information from Colossae to Paul. He might have even been sent from Colossae on behalf of the church to comfort Paul and serve him during his imprisonment.

vs 13

Although he is far away from those churches, he is working hard for them. It's interesting that Paul focuses primarily on his prayer role in the last verse, so we don't know what else, if anything, he was doing.

vs 14-15

Some more greetings both ways. Nympha has a church in her house - there really is no end to influential women in the early church.

vs 16

This little verse does heaps to show us that, even at their original writing, the early NT letters were designed to be passed around from church to church. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have the letter to the Laodecians. In fact, it seemed to drop out of circulation, because there isn't much mention of it anywhere. But that's ok.

vs 17

Although it's a relevant verse for any Christian, it's healthy to recognise that it is written to a specific individual! What was his job? I have no idea. But it was important enough that Paul wrote specifically about it.

vs 18

Typical Paul ending. Yay. Colossians is a good book.

Colossians chapter 4

vs 4

The Bible isn't about fiscal equality, which can be a bit of a blow to some of us. There is a level of balancing, but it accepts as reality the division of rich and poor. Instead, the idea is for the poor to be diligent, and the rich to be generous.

vs 2

Do we often think of prayer as requiring alertness? How many of us think "I'd better keep a sharp eye out, so that I know what to pray for"?

vs 3

Open doors are somewhat capricious - not even Paul takes the opportunity every time. But Paul wants the mystery that he has openly proclaimed in this book to be proclaimed elsewhere. He sees it as his message and his work, regardless of the current restraints.

vs 4

Even Paul could have trouble being as clear as he knew he should be. And it's basically his full time job! That takes a lot of guts to admit.

vs 5

And now he expands the ministry to the Colossians and the impact they should be having on their own area. Paul wants the same thing for them - to have opportunities, and for them to make the most of them.

vs 6

Not everyone's a preacher. We know that Paul got up and gave speeches, but that's not his message for Colossae - it was with individuals that they were to be gracious and salty - in their everyday conversation.

vs 7

And is probably carrying this letter to the church, so it's worth introducing him.

vs 8

Every letter that Paul sent, pretty much, came with a human courier who would have also had a message about what was happening where Paul was, how things were going, and so on. It's a part of the message that we simply don't get.

vs 9

Onesimus is most probably the slave from Philemon. Not called a slave here though (Tychicus possibly is!) - instead, called a faithful and dear brother.

Colossians chapter 3

vs 13

I wish it were as easy as it is written here. Paul is right, though - our model of forgiveness should be based on the model that God used to forgive us. How can we hold anything against anyone? We should put up with each other because God has called us together

vs 14

Love is the binding force of these traits which Paul has named. It doesn't matter how compassionate and kind and gentle you are if there is no love. And it's not 'Awwwww' love (sentimental) or 'Woo!' love (erotic), it's love like God loves us, and it's actually a command. So it is something you can do.

vs 15

This doesn't just mean peace as in 'no war'. Peace is not just the absence of war, like darkness is the absence of light. It is harmony, mutual security and safety. That is, it is not just empty tolerance, but a positive working together to create something good.

Being thankful goes without saying, but Paul saying it makes it so much more powerful.

vs 16

I think the TNIV is more correct here - that the teaching and admonishing is going on via the psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Psalmos literally means the twanging of a musical instrument, but also refers to pious songs. Humnos apparently comes from the root word hudeo which meant to celebrate - but the word itself seems to mean sacred spiritual song. Pneumatikos means 'of or pertaining to the spirit' (with all the varied meanings of spirit) and ode means song. Why is a humnos different from an ode? Well, a psalmos seems to be differentiated by musical instrument involvement, humnos seems to be in some sort of religious pattern. Ode might be the musical equivalent of 'other'.

The notion of thanks continues here - God should be thanked even in our singing - even when we are singing to each other to admonish!

vs 17

Just in case you were thinking that there might be some thing that you should or should not do that isn't covered in Paul's list, he adds this verse. Notice that thankfulness runs a direct path through this passage.

Notice also that Paul's division is word and deed - and if you look at the passage as a whole, you might see the wdDW (deed word DEED WORD) parallelism - between evil deeds and evil words, then good deeds and good words.

vs 18

Yeah!

vs 19

Oh... right. I guess we should do that too.

vs 20

Everything? Or is Paul being a little hyperbolic here.

I think if you look at the nature of these short, pithy sentences, you will see that they take the model of proverbial wisdom, which means you aren't meant to think of them as rules standing for all time in every situation, but as general rules which are for the most part in your benefit.

vs 21

Take this one for example - sometimes your children will become embittered no matter how much you try not to discourage them. You just do the best you can not to accentuate it.

vs 22

I think the TNIV made a mistake using an idiomatic phrase like 'curry favour'. "Win favour" was far better.

I think the link between the command to children and parents and slaves and masters shows us just how different slavery is from employment. Employees should follow their masters in all things to do with work - but slaves were all work all the time, because you were owned. There is no need to listen to your employer's commands about what you should do when you get home.

vs 23

This is akin to verse 17. You can see how important Paul thinks this idea is - that God is at the centre of whatever we are doing.

vs 24

Ahh, now here is one of the spots in the NT where a reward for good works is hinted at. I personally think there is going to be a reward for good works - for Christians, anyway. I don't think it's got anything to do with your salvation - it is more a reward to a faithful servant who has done their job well.

Some would disagree with me, especially because of the word 'inheritance'. Fair enough.

vs 25

They might also disagree with me because this verse talks about a punishment for wrongs. The 'and there is no favourtism' is significant - because if everyone is punished for wrongs, does that include Christians, who are under God's grace? Does it mean there are non-salvation specific punishments for wrongdoing? Or is it talking about punishments in the here and now for not following wisdom? It's an interesting question.

Colossians chapter 3

vs 1

Interestingly, the word 'heart' isn't even mentioned in the NASB and KJV. Which is probably all for the best, because the ancient culture thought the organs did different things. But I'd be interested to see if the greek word used mentions the organ...

Which it doesn't. Which really makes me wonder why they would use it in the IVs. The word seems to mean to seek or to meditate on. So do that.

vs 2

Ok, so this verse really does mention the mind, using a word with the root phren, which means 'faculty for perceiving of judging' and actually refers to a part of the heart. Weird culture.

So making the point that we focus our emotions and our minds on heavenly things isn't exactly correct - for Paul this is much more an intellectual (you are thinking, meditating and setting your mind on it after all).

vs 3

Only a Christian could say that you have died but you're not dead. We're crazy that way.

vs 4

It's interesting that the greek word for life used here, zeo, (and its root zao) have similar cross-meanings with english. So a saying in english like "you are alive, but you've never really lived" would work in greek too. Which makes me wonder if that is kinda what Paul is saying here - sort of a wordplay. We have died, and our lives (like our living lives) are in Christ. When Christ (who is our "real life") appears, we appear with him too. Of course for Paul, 'really living' wasn't about parties and stuff, but about a life devoted to God.

vs 5

Well, according to my non-greek reading of the greek, the NASB is completely ineffectual in its translation here, which is a shame. I don't know why they put "consider" in there at all - the verb doesn't seem to suggest that. It seems to suggest the active "kill it!" of the IVs (or even the 'mortify' of the KJV, for all those who know how to mortify something).

The point being that there is an active role for us. We might say "Oh, we can't deal with sin, only Christ can". But Paul tells the reader to put it to death. We should at least try. And the knowledge of our true lives being in Christ should help us.

This is one of those verses where Paul makes it clear that greed is idolatry. Making a material sin sound like a spiritual sin gives it a whole lot more impact.

vs 6

Which is bad.

Just for interest, the NASB and KVJ online add the early mss thing into the verse, but my print version of the NASB does not.

vs 7

Some people might make the argument that the list of sins in vs 5 is particularly gentile in nature. But I would say that the inclusion of idolatry as a function of greed is making it clear that Jews aren't all that special either. We're all sinful.

vs 8

I have said in sermons before that if you delineate these two lists of sins, that the first one is primarily sins against God, and the second is primarily sins against other people. I am aware that greed is harmful to ohters, but Paul's focus on it is its idolatrous aspects, which is obviously more a you-and-God thing.

vs 9-10

I wonder if the church had a problem with lying. Perhaps they did. Or perhaps Paul just adds it afterwards because he thinks it makes this next thought more complete. Notice particularly it is 'lying to each other' which makes me think it is referring to something specific.

Anyway, his point flows into another, which is about the change in our selves, between the old self and the new self. Notice two points. Paul said earlier that our true lives would appear when Christ finally appears. But he wants the readers to stop lying right now, because the old self has gone and the new self is over us! But that new self is 'being renewed' in the present.

vs 11

This statement about the equality of all in Christ (or more correctly the equality of Christ in all) tells us that there was some problems of prejudice in the ranks, but you can see it was even between different gentiles, and even between slaves and non-slaves.

vs 12

Again with the clothing thing. I wonder if they made clothes in Colossae or something. These things are almost entirely to do with dealing with other people. We can be humble before God, too, and patient, but not kind, gentle or compassionate. So our Christianity really does need to be earthy and other-people focused, not just between us and God.

Colossians chapter 2

vs 13

Paul is fond of making this point, and it is a good point - that our salvation came while we were still sinners. We don't have to reach some arbitrary point of goodness, let alone perfection, before Christ's death is enough to save us.

vs 14

Wow, the TNIV certainly says something different here. It puts a lot more of the focus on "us", on our indebtedness. That's not a way that we normally look at this verse. The NIV suggests a more neutral "written code" and "regulations" which is taken away. The NASB called it a 'certificate of debt'. The focus on us obviously makes this a lot more personal a move.

vs 15

The powers and authorities are distanced from us. Obviously they had power over us, or else their disarming wouldn't have been quite so great as Paul makes out here. But it's less that we place them over us, and more that they dominate us. But not anymore! Jesus not only disarms them, but embarrasses them through his death. It's such a weird victory, but it works!

vs 16

Therefore - so we don't let people judge us for these things because powers and authorities have been disarmed, and the indebtedness which was against us has been cancelled.

vs 17

So notice that it is only these things which are shadows of Christ that we aren't to be judged on. Things that were covered by legalisms and governed by authorities. People will still judge you if you're doing things outside this framework.

vs 18

The worship of angels is not as prevalent as it was then, I don't think anyway. But the puffery of false humility is huge. Note that in the end, their mind isn't spiritual, although their actions might puff themselves up to make them look super spiritual.

vs 19

We wouldn't often describe a body as growing from the head down. But 'head' in greek is apparently as nebulous a word as it is in English. So you might imagine a corporation growing from it's 'head' down. Note that while the body is still supported by all its other members, it is God's will that it grows from the head. All growth comes from Christ. And these false humble people have lost that connection, so there is no growth there. They are the clipped toenails of the body.

vs 20

Here this term 'elemental spiritual forces' comes up again. The idea that the following verses refer to spiritual forces is really a little beyond me, with my cultural background anyway. But it's a novel notion, and it would have been far more prevalent an understanding when Paul wrote I am sure.

Anyway, even if it is the truth that these forces are spiritual in nature, we are free from them, because of Christ's death! Woo!

vs 21

These rules, which Paul possibly sees as basic concepts of the world, are not given any power over us anymore. We are able, because of our freedom through Christ's death, to ignore these things.

vs 22

Ahhh, the truth comes out here. Even if they are basic spiritual principles, they are still based on human teachings. They are not fundamentally from God. "Do not handle things that are red hot" is of God - "Do not touch a corpse" is just a human teaching. Sure, you might catch a disease, but someone's got to move the corpse, right?

vs 23

That's often the biggest trap for us - these rules seem like they are wise! People can give you any number of reasons why to follow them. Take the food laws for example. Now, these are a little different because God put them in place. But people even today will talk about how much healthier these laws are to follow, how you shouldn't eat pork, or blood. But health isn't the issue - we're talking about spiritual morality, and there's no spiritual immorality in eating black pudding. Following any set of rules or laws is not going to help you feel less sinful, it's not going to help you stop sinning. Christ's power does that, by cancelling the whole debt.

Colossians chapter 2

vs 1



That's a fair whack of people he is contending for.



vs 2



So knowledge of Christ (in his capacity as mystery of God) comes from having a complete understanding, which comes from encouragement and unity. Some very similar themes to Ephesians here - namely, understanding and unity - but with the added theme of this mystery, which Paul names fairly openly as Christ.



vs 3



Wisdom, thy name is Christ. Just be careful not to take the "Christ is wisdom personofied" thing too far, because then you get into trouble in Proverbs. Instead, I think of Christ as the key that unlocks wisdom and understanding. Think about it - Jesus answers so many questions, not with his lips, but with his life.



vs 4



Ahhh, now this is worth knowing. This gives us some context, because obviously the Colossians were under threat of fine-sounding arguments.



vs 5



Listening to that compliment, it makes you think that the threat is more of a potential threat than an actual one. Or perhaps the threat is only a spark at the moment.



vs 6



This verse, along with vs 7, are the hinges of the entire book. We are now transitioning from the past into the future. There must be continuity in the life of faith. Very similar to Ephesians - the idea of pressing on.



vs 7



So just as you are rooted (or have a foundation), so build on it. Just as you received faith, grow stronger in that faith. And just as you were thankful, let thankfulness overflow. Everything is a picture of building up and increasing.



vs 8



Interesting new translation here in the TNIV. Regardless of how you read it, we have two things that need definition - "human tradition" and "basic principles of forces of this world".



Human tradition is fairly straightforward, I think - it is the body of socio-cultural teaching which grows up in any human environment, which seeks to influence how you live. Back then, the obvious one is the very organised and stylised traditions of the Jewish religious teachers. There are just as many rules and influences on us now which are nothing more than made up by people. They might have certain elements which are laudable, but insofar as they do not rely on Christ for their foundation, they aren't worth basing your life on.


But what are the "basic principles" or "elemental spiritual forces" of this world? World is always such a difficult word in the NT, because it means so many different things. But I think from the context, it is fairly clear that Paul is talking about the world in a negative and universal sense, but not so much a human social sense. Which is why I like the idea of "elementary spiritual forces", because it nails this down a lot more - one comment about human tradition, one comment about basic, crude spirituality. Both of which would have been a pressure on the Colossians, and both of which are not founded on Christ. And we are just as susceptible to this kind of crude spirituality when we get sucked into superstitions.




Whatever they both are, of course, they are not to be relied on. Christ is meant to be your foundation.

vs 9

This is the second time Paul has confirmed the deity of Christ, and in a single half sentence has even managed to stress his bodily form too.

vs 10

Which is just reiterating what he talked about regarding supremacy in the last chapter.

vs 11

Now we start getting into some human tradition. Circumcision was a covenant started by God in the OT - it's even older than Moses. But by this time in history, it had become a shambles, becoming the meaning instead of being a symbol for a greater meaning.

vs 12

Paul instead talks about a second symbol which they used in his time and, in some churches, has become just as much a shambles as circumcision was. We can't read verse 11 and say "oh, those poor duped Israelites for taking a symbolic ritual too far" and then read verse 12 and say "Ahh, because we've got the right ritual now!" That would be very poor hermenutics.

Colossians chapter 1

vs 21

I think it's interesting that 'evil behaviour' causes us to be enemies 'in our minds' - there's a crossover of mind/body dualism if ever I saw one.

But what exactly does 'enemies in our minds' mean? The most simple reading would seem to be that we only thought we were enemies of God. But we know that we really were enemies of God. So I assume that Paul means 'hostile in mind' (NASB) - that we had a mind that was hostile towards God.

vs 22

Christ's physical body - so it really was a physical death of an actual person. Which to me seems that sin has a physical death component. Anyway, this act has caused us to be reconciled and made holy.

vs 23

But it is conditional on a firm faith in the gospel. And not just any gospel - Paul goes to the length of pointing out that it must be the gospel they heard from him!

vs 24

Interesting that the NIV has suffered in the past tense, whereas the TNIV changes it to the present tense. The NIV also doesn't specify that they were Paul's sufferings, although all my other translations do.

This verse is important, because in it Paul is pointing out, more clearly than anywhere else in the Bible, that Christ's sufferings were lacking in one regard for the salvation of all by the gospel Paul preached. It is something that Paul is able to take up in his own body.

vs 25

Here it is. It is the service of presenting the gospel to all people. Which includes the Colossians.

vs 26

Paul says this mystery has been hidden, but it hasn't, not really. The OT was fairly open about it, but it wasn't until now really that the emphasis has been put on it. To Paul, it is now time to fulfil this mystery.

This mystery of the gospel is a fairly common theme throughout Paul's books, and it pretty much always means the same thing.

vs 27

The mystery is pretty much always tied up in Christ and ministry to the gentiles. The exact reading of this passage makes the mystery about Christ's indwelling in the Christian, but its involvement with gentiles is equally mysterious. If you like, it is a mystery within a mystery. And both now have been revealed, because Paul's ministry isn't to keep things mysterious, but to make them known.

vs 28

This is a great summary of P&T's ministry. What they do, how they do it, and to what end.

vs 29

And even though Paul acknowledges that it is the power of Christ which works in him so powerfully, he still notes that it is a strenuous work that he does. God's power doesn't make our works easy, it makes them possible.

Colossians chapter 1

vs 11

The power of God in this case is for endurance and patience. I don't know how many times I have prayed for those things. Just think - next time you ask someone to be patient, you're asking them to call on the mighty power of the Lord!

vs 12

We should be thankful, because it is only by God's qualification that we can become members of the kingdom.

vs 13

Obviously in reference to the thing before about joining the kingdom, but this verse also shows that we were a member of another kingdom before that - or a dominion, which enslaved us. So it is not that we have come from a neutral position to join the kingdom, but instead we have been brought out of slavery into Christ's kingdom.

vs 14

So it is no wonder Paul speaks of redemption here, after describing us as being saved from a dark dominion. And his elucidation makes it clear what he's talking about - the slavery of sin.

vs 15

Interesting that the NASB uses the word 'of', which is completely incorrect theologically.

Remember that mankind is in the image of God - Jesus basically fulfils Adam's role as the image untarnished. And he inherits all creation, being the firstborn.

vs 16

The TNIV uses some interestingly different wording from the NIV here, talking about creation being made 'through' Christ instead of 'by' Christ. Regardless of how you read it, the authority and supremacy of Jesus as creator is well trumpeted here, with the entire reason for creation being for Christ.

vs 17

There aren't as many verses that talk about the sustaining power of holding creation together, but here is a good one. It also stresses his pre-eminence over creation by being before it.

vs 18

So Christ is already head of creation, but now more specifically he is head of the church, and also he is first among the resurrected. If anyone is in doubt of his supremacy, then this should clear it up.

vs 19

Which is a good explaination for why Christ is so supreme - because he is fully God.

vs 20

It wasn't enough to just be supremo over everything, though. God wanted relationship, not just brute authority. This is a good verse when you're wanting to back up God's attitude towards free will I think - his desire and plan involved reconciliation of people to himself if they denied his authority in the first place.

Colossians chapter 1

vs 1

Paul and Timothy are at it again, this time writing this very well known book.

vs 2

...to the Colossians!

vs 3

It's interesting thinking of God in relation to Christ, rather than thinking of Christ in relation to God. But this book is so Christ-centred, that it shouldn't be suprising.

vs 4

Getting rid of the word "saints" is an interesting choice in the TNIV. What does it mean, really, beyond 'people of God'? And isn't it just a confusing word to people from western societies who think saints are like 'Saint Francis of Asissi'?

What a great thing to be thankful for. Just think how crappy your church could be if it did not have these two things.

vs 5

These things don't just come because the people in church are nice people. They come from a hope which is created by the gospel. Note that it's the true word of the gospel, not the Bible. The gospel is a message contained within the Bible, though.

vs 6

P&T let the Colossians know that what has happened there has been multiplied around the world. Which is really exciting and encouraging news. P&T do seem a little repetitive here, but I guess they are stressing that the numerical growth around the world is paralleled by the spiritual growth of the Colossians.

vs 7

So the church in Colossae was planted by Epaphras, not P&T. Interesting. But he does seem to be linked to P&T somehow.

vs 8

He also seems to travel to and fro between P&T, perhaps bringing the information which sparked this letter.

vs 9

Very similar to Paul's prayer for the Ephesians - asking for wisdom and understanding. Perhaps Paul opens his letters with this prayer in the hope that the reading church will accept them as such.

vs 10

P&T want the Colossians to have this wisdom and understanding not just for the sake of it, but because they believed that increasing wisdom increases how upstandingly you live your life, and also your relationship with God (remember that 'knowledge of God' is not just about knowing about God, it is about knowing God).

Psalm 2

Another psalm. I could use them at the moment.

vs 1

It's a rhetorical question, which gets answered in the rest of the song. Very poetic.

vs 2

The TNIV here is far less wordy than the NIV. It does make it clear that kings and rulers together are against God and his anointed, which the other translations all struggle with a little. Who is God's anointed? I am guessing it is the king of Israel.

Of course, the messianic reference cannot be escaped here either.

vs 3

So the kings and rulers of earth are under the dominion of God and his anointed, but they want to rebel, break free.

vs 4

God actually scoffs at such talk. We don't often think of God laughing and scoffing at the foolishness of mankind. But he does. Or at least according to Psalm 2 he does. I don't think people like the idea of God mocking them. But Jesus mocked the Pharisees when they said stupid things.

vs 5

It's not a gentle "oh look at the silly children" laughter, it is an angry scoffing "Ha Ha Ha! You will never defeat me fools!" laughter. It rebukes them, it scares them. And so does his actual message, which is...

vs 6

Why is this such a scary message? Because for all these kings and rulers, leadership is what they have. They are in charge. But God says to them "you're not in charge at all. I place kings. And I have a chosen king, and I have placed him on my holy place".

vs 7

To this king, God makes a promise of relationship - a father/son relationship, which is probably the most important relationship in that culture - it is the relationship of inheritance.

vs 8

The other rulers have a right to be afraid, if God is promising this king the whole earth. What's left for them?

vs 9

Not only will they not rule, but it sounds like they are going to be subservient to yet another under God. Not attractive to kings.

I remember in youth group Cynthia misreading this verse as 'dashed them with pottery', so now God forever rains down earthen jugs on the disobedient in my mind.

vs 10

So now the rulers are warned. They are warned to be wise. The ultimate wisdom of the OT (and NT) is the fear of the Lord. Not just terror at him taking away their power. Instead, the righteous awe of God for him being God.

vs 11

What did I say about fear? Here it is. Serving with fear and celebrating with trembling. It's not about being afraid because the king is going to kill you (sometimes that might be the case - say if your king was Josef Stalin). Instead, it is fearing the king purely because it is the king - a person of such great might and authority, that you are cowed just by their reputation.

But it's not a bad thing. It is a thing to celebrate. God in charge is the best thing we can hope for. Better than any of us in charge.

vs 12

I like how the TNIV puts this, because the 'lest he be angry' of the NIV is a holdover from the KJV, which is even worse, because you 'perish from the way' (whatever that means). In the NIV you are destroyed 'in your way' (I choose death by chocolate). In the TNIV 'you and your ways are destroyed' - ok, that holds the gravity I am looking for!

'Kiss the son' means swear fealty to him, like kissing his pinky ring. I don't know that they did the ring thing back then, but they did do the kiss thing.

Notice two more things. God's wrath - or the wrath of his son - can flare up in a moment. Sometimes you wonder whether God is ever going to punish someone for their evil. Well, he is incredibly patient, but you can't let that be your guiding principe. Angry stuff is all the more angry when it flares up suddenly. Much better to be blessed by taking refuge in the son - a very interesting NT allusion.

Psalm 1

No, I haven't gone crazy. I certainly won't do every psalm in a row.

vs 1

Wow, the TNIV scholars really went to town on Psalm 1. Who doesn't fondly remember those poetic words of the opening of the book of Psalms, as read by Don Carson on numerous occasions? I think the TNIV is more easily understandable, but it does lose a bit more of the poetry. I suppose it is a worthwhile sacrifice.

Anyway, whereas I might have tried to better explain the NIV ("stand in the way" means something completely different idiomatically to us), the TNIV expresses it perfectly. It describes how blessed those are who aren't being or acting wicked.

vs 2

So contrasted with those who might be or act wicked are those who contemplate God's law and delight in it. They will be blessed. So blessing does not simply come to those who are not openly wicked, but to those who delight in God's law and are active - not just in deed either, but in thought.

vs 3

What a lovely picture. Just imagine, if you will, that sugar is incredibly hard to come by, and so the most delectable and tasty thing around is fruit. Or imagine that chocolate grows on trees. Either way, this is not a blessing of sustenance, it is a blessing of prosperity. They are well resourced, well looked after, and they are productive. That is the result of a life which is spent contemplating and delighting in God's Word.

Is that so hard to believe?

vs 4

Chaff is basically the opposite of fruit. You would never eat it. Instead, it represents all the hard work you need to do just to get the grain to make your daily bread. It was separated with wind, hence the picture.

vs 5

"The judgement" is an interesting term. It gives judgement a sort of finality. There will be a final judgement, and in it the wicked won't stand. Apparently, there will also be an assembly of the righteous. I am assuming, because of the context, that this also is an eschatalogical thing. But it could well be that not only do the wicked fall in the final judgement, but they can't even stand among the righteous in this world. I lean towards the eschatalogical though.

vs 6

Well, several thousand years have passed since this psalm was penned, and the ways of the wicked have yet to be destroyed, so I am going to assume that will happen in the end times. But the Lord watches over the righteous now, and did then, and will continue to do so. The NASB and KJV use the term "know" instead of "watch over". I don't really find that helpful per se (I mean, if we read that simply, and we assume God knows everything, then it's pretty meaningless - so therefore it is more complicated, but not really expressed), but in combination with the term 'watch over', I think we get a better understanding of what is being said - that God keeps the righteous in mind, and regards them with special care.

Ephesians chapter 6

vs 13

When is the day of evil? Is it the same as the day of the Lord? Or is it another time? Earlier, Paul said the days themselves were evil, so I am assuming this is an ongoing thing.

The purpose of this armour, overall, is to stand firm in Christ. That's worth remembering.

vs 14-17
There isn't a whole lot I can say about this list. I could do the typical sermon thing and explain why truth holds your pants up and righteousness is armour. I'm not sure how valid this is. Some make more sense than others. What I do know is true is that all of these things are of value to the Christian life, and useful in spiritual warfare. Truth, righteousness, readiness, faith, salvation and the Word of God (which I generally read as the gospel). Not what we would seek to fight a battle with, but I guess spiritual warfare is not what we would expect either.

vs 18

Prayer is another vital part of this mission. Not just prayer for yourself, but prayer for all of God's people. 'Be alert' may as well say 'keep informed about what the rest of the church is doing' so that you can pray for them.

vs 19

Paul in particular wants prayer for words. I think sometimes I just assume the words I am using are right - rather than relying on God to provide them like he provides everything else.

vs 20

Paul does not even think that his fearlessness comes from himself, but indeed he also wants prayer that he can continue in that frame of mind.

vs 21

And what a loss to us not to have his words. But it does show that, though what we have is valuable, the 1st century church did have access to word of mouth information that we don't.

vs 22

I assume he was carrying this letter. Introducing the letter bearer is a not uncommon thing in the ancient world.

vs 23

The TNIV adds sisters. Which makes me realise just how much I value functionally equivalent translations.

vs 24

Let's hope we all do.

Ephesians chapter 6

vs 1

Extending the idea of a family and how to treat each other within that family, we have children obeying their parents. What is interesting is that Paul doesn't go outside a 'nuclear' family.

vs 2-3

Paul now backs it up with some OT quoting. It is an interesting point, about this being a commandment with a promise for a good life. I wonder why God sees the need for that promise to be there.

vs 4

I find this really cutting edge for the time period. I mean, children's rights are right here. That they are even mentioned in such a caring manner is pretty incredible to me.

vs 5

The slave/master relationship is a fairly complex one for us to understand, when we don't have it in our culture. The simple existence of this in the letter shows that slaves made up at least part of the early church in Ephesus.

vs 6

What this, and all the other commands in this section, really emphasise is the need for Christians to model Christ in their relationships, and to have Christ in the centre of your mind when doing everything.

vs 7-8

I just think it's worth noting that Paul extends this principle to all people, not just slaves. So a good work ethic is actually part of everyone's responsibility to Christ, not just workers.

vs 9

We all serve the same master, and as such are all slaves to him. You remember what happened in Jesus' story where one minion fights with another minion over owed money? Not good. Unfortunately, I think the religious right wing of Christianity has been so infected by the need for employer's rights that they have forgotten about the fact that employees are actually not as well off. Of course, in a perfect world, the workers would work hard, and the employers would give them what they deserve and treat them fairly - pretty obvious we don't live there, isn't it?

vs 10

How many different ways can you say strong?

vs 11

It has been a little bit of an undercurrent throughout the book, but Paul makes clear here that the Christian will combat forces of spiritual evil. And for that, you need spiritual defense and offense.

vs 12

The heavenly realms, remember, is not heaven - it is a description of the spiritual plane, where evil also exists. This is the plane on which humans are powerless. I mean, we can't even see it! Which is why we need to rely on God and his power to help us in our battles there. That in itself shows us how important the spiritual realm is - that it forces us into needing God utterly.

Ephesians chapter 5

vs 23

For all I could say about this verse, I would like to point out that Paul doesn't fall back on creation principles here, but on the principle of Christ's headship. It doesn't make the conclusion any different, but it might make other assumptions different.

vs 24

Marriage then becomes less a picture of creation (and more regularly the fall, with one in dominance over the other), and more a picture of Christ's sacrificial love (with one in submission to the other). Again - same result, but different reason.

vs 25

People say that this is the harder command - I say baloney. So much easier to love your wife than to submit to someone else. We husbands are called to submit anyway (don't forget verse 21), but loving your wife as Christ loved the church is still not as big a difficulty I think.

vs 26

This verse does indicate a form of spiritual responsibility for the growth and maturity of your wife.

vs 27

Remember, this is a picture of what Christ did for Christians, and as such husbands aren't going to be able to do it as well as Christ did. But the purpose is still important. It doesn't mean preaching sermons to your wife, at least in my opinion, but it does mean encouraging her to go to BSF or KYB or similar, and looking after children while she does so if necessary.

vs 28-29

Paul here is agreeing with me - how hard is it to look after our own bodies? Well, that's what it should be like looking after a wife.

And Christ sees his own responsibility for the church - to feed it and take care of it.

vs 30

Again, the unity of the church is paramount here. Paul can't escape from its importance even while teaching about marriage.

vs 31

Well known verse from Genesis.

vs 32

This is a profound mystery indeed! Understand what Paul is doing here. He is not saying that the more recent is an allegory of a past truth, but instead is saying that the past state is a reflection of an eternal truth!

Remember that marriage is not an eternal union (according to Jesus), but Christ's unity with the church is eternal. It is the eternal which is the truth, and the temporary which is the picture.

vs 33

But Paul hastens to add that even though marriage is temporary it is still in existence, so make sure you both respect your respective sides of the bargain.

Ephesians chapter 5

vs 12

Are we seriously not meant to discuss the shameful things that are done in secret by the disobedient? I mean, this would be a good enough definition for Paul's earlier command to not discuss obscene things, but it seems untenable, dare I say impossible? The weak response may be to say that Paul's being hyperbolic, but in this sentence, just taken on itself, I would almost lean in that direction.

vs 13

Ok, so now go back and read 11, 12 and 13 together. So rather than making the deeds of the shameful a topic of dinner discussion, go and shine the light of Christ in the darkness, and these deeds will come to light. When Paul says that anything illuminated becomes a light (TNIV), I don't think he's saying that because you go and expose dark deeds, that those doing them will suddenly become Christians and sing for joy. That might happen. I think instead Paul means that anything that light shines on becomes visible (NIV).

Again the biblegateway NIV has an incorrect verse numbering.

vs 14

This must be some sort of Christian song, because it's not from a psalm or anything. It's kinda cool to see into their culture a bit through that. It is talking about Christ's light shining on those that are dead, and the dead coming to life in Christ.

vs 15

Wisdom, knowledge and understanding have formed such a large part of this book.

vs 16

The very time the Ephesians lived in was evil. Is our time any more evil? Or any less evil? Probably about the same. Perhaps a little less, for us anyway, because we won't have people stringing us up for being Christians. But others in our world do suffer that.

Paul's response to these evil days is to see them as an opportunity to do as much of God's work as we can.

vs 17

There's a dichotomy for you. But it's very Proverb-ial - the Proverbs basically define wisdom as knowing God's will, and foolishness as not.

vs 18

I don't know if that had the same play on words that it does now.

vs 19

Instead of singing drunken anthems on the way home from the pub, which I am sure happened back then as much as it does now.

vs 20

Thanksgiving is another large part of this book.

vs 21

Submission therefore goes both ways, and this verse crowns the next section on how Christians deal with one another in specific relationships.

vs 22

I've heard sermons where the preacher has said "Big deal! The men have a much harder job". Let's just perpetuate a maleocentric view, eh? The fact is that the verse just before this one tells everyone to submit to everyone else. So this is just an opening statement to wives. It's not an easy thing. But obviously, at least in Ephesus, there was a problem with this, or else Paul wouldn't need to bring it up. It might have just been a cultural problem where people thought the Christians were weird because their wives had so much freedom. Or it could just be that everyone wasn't living quite the way they should be, and so Paul writes something to each group so as to specifically include everyone.

Ephesians chapter 5

vs 1

Imitating God, or following his example, would be pretty much impossible without his incarnation. How can humans follow the example of a God in heaven?

vs 2

The primary example we should follow is Christ's sacrificial love. However, we're not to give up our lives necessarily, but instead live them out for the same purpose.

vs 3

Not even a hint! Not a whisper. These first three things seem to be focused on activity.

vs 4

These next three seem to be focused on how we speak. The NASB calls it 'silly talk' which just sounds funny.

But what do these things really mean? It's important, because we do a lot of talking. Does obscenity mean you can't talk about gynecology? Does foolish talk mean we're not allowed to go "gibber gabby googoo" at babies? Does coarse joking mean we aren't allowed to use sarcasm?

These terms obviously have meanings, so we can't discount them. But is it possible that they have to be read in a bit of a cultural context? If so, how do we choose how to read these in relation to our context? If we follow the norms of our context, then we won't be any different. If we choose the norms of 30 years ago, then aren't we just championing a different cultural context (a historical one)? Of course, if we judge it personally by what we feel, then we'll get into arguments.

vs 5

We can see the obvious repetition of verse 3 here. Paul also draws a string between greed [or coveting in the NASB] and idolatry. This isn't the only time, either. And that has major implications for a society that has almost championed greed.

vs 6

If we think about the parallel between vs 3&5, there might be a similar one between 4&6. I don't know about that for sure, but it is interesting that this one seems to be talking about empty words. So is it possible that the main problem with the types of speech in vs 4 is that they are 'empty', that is, they deceive people because of their lack of truth? That might help a little, but it still seems to spell the death penalty for jokes and sarcasm.

vs 7

The root word for what is translated as partner here is used in Luke 5:7 to describe their fishing partners. So I guess it means like a business partner, however in Ephesians it also has a preposition thing which denotes union. The word used in Ephesians isn't used anywhere else, by the way.

vs 8

Paul goes one step further than normal here - instead of the Ephesians being "in darkness" or "in light", he just calls them straight out darkness and light. Which makes it sound much more spiritually bound to who they are as people, in my opinion.

vs 9

If you have any queries about what it means to live in the light, Paul gives an excellent summary here.

vs 10

Find out! There is a searching here, a learning, a process. Christians don't just know. We have to work at it, learning what God's will is. It's not that God's will is necessarily progressive or changing, but instead that every generation has to discover it.

vs 11

Wow. Does he really mean that? That makes Christians sound like 1930's pulp detectives. "$20 a week, plus expenses" and we go and expose who the bad guys are. Awesome.

The reality is, of course, that the prophets expected Israel to do this. It means pointing out the iniquity and injustice that people do, and defending the cause of those who are defenceless. Christians should be doing this all the time. But sadly, we are afraid of doing it, because then the rich, powerful unjust people hate us. And they are bad enemies to have. Lucky we've got God on our side, eh? But we don't often think like that.

Ephesians chapter 4

vs 22

Here is what Paul taught the Ephesians about how to live their lives - the first step was to remove the old self, which he saw as corrupted by sinful desires. So sinful desire is the first thing that needs to be dealt with. And to deal with it, you must remove it completely.

Of course, that's now how it happens, but that's what is taught. Thoroughly ideological, but it's good to have something to strive for.

vs 23

I think this, in the context of the last verse, is not a new command, but a reiteration of the previous one. Removing sinful desires is not entirely intellectual or mind-based, but Paul now focuses on the mind as one of the places where this purge must take place. He words it positively, though, to show that this purge is not nihilistic, but it replaces one thing with another. A new mind.

vs 24

Like I said, sinful desires aren't entirely mind-based. They aren't entirely body-based either - I think there are spiritual problems, environmental problems, and perhaps others. Paul doesn't use the turn body, exactly - he uses the term 'self' which is probably far more inclusive. Think of all the things that make up who you are. Environment, history, physical appearance, lots of things make up who you are. Paul is showing, however, that God has control even over our self, and has prepared for us new selfs, which we should accept.

Our self, that which makes us who we are, is quite often one of the things we are least likely to want to give up, because we think it is one of the things we have that is truly ours. The truth, of course, is that it's not really all that much ours, because so many factors outside us make us who we are. We couldn't control our birth parents, social situation, nationality, hair colour, gender, height and lots of things. So in that case, it's comforting to know that God controls it anyway. And that because of him, we can be righteous and holy.

vs 25

You would think that truthful speech in a church would be one of the easier things to deal with - not so! Because truthful speech is not just a lack of 'saying something that isn't true', but it is also 'saying things which are true'. Saying nothing is not speaking truthfully.

vs 26

The verse from the psalms, and Paul's comment, both assume anger, but expect a control of anger. Why are they angry - perhaps because people have started speaking truthfully?

vs 27

Anger can give the devil a foothold, that's for sure. But I think that failing to speak the truth in love does more damage than anger by far. That's my personal opinion. In some cultures, I know that quite often their culture demonises anger so much that it becomes more damaging.

vs 28

Christians... stealing! I think we've got some idea of the rawness of some of the people in the church. But then, I think if we looked into our own lives, or our own churches, we would see a lot of things where we would say "Christians... !". Unfortunately, I think churches have lost the power to say to people "you mustn't do thing X anymore" for so many things. Of course, in a way I think that's good, because in the past thing X has been so subjective that we ended up banning TV, movies, dancing, musical instruments, overhead projectors...

vs 29

So it's not "if you don't have anything nice, don't say anything at all", it's "if you don't have anything helpful for building others up, don't say anything at all". Good luck with this one. I know I speak a whole lot of crap.

vs 30

... How am I meant to know how to not grieve the Holy Spirit without you telling me, Paul! Is this really a sentence on its own? Every translation I read says it is. The NASB makes it pointedly clear by not even including 'and' at the beginning. Sometimes I find verses like this scary, because it is really quite hard to know what it means. Some people will respond by saying that you have to read other parts of the NT to understand this verse - just tell me which parts the Ephesians had, and I'll be happy.

vs 31

Is this how we go about not grieving the Holy Spirit perhaps? It does seem contextual.

vs 32

Our compassion and forgiveness comes not from ourselves, but from Christ. We've always got to remember that.

Ephesians chapter 4

vs 11

Wow, now there's quite a difference between the T and the NIV. The NIV says what we are all used to, that Christ gave some 'to be' these different roles. But the TNIV says that Christ gave these things. Which makes it sound a lot more past tense - as if there are not prophets, pr apostles, or teachers or evangelists, but they were only given at a certain time. Which is obviously not true. And that is not what it is saying, I don't think - it just sounds like that.

vs 12

But what it does do is change the emphasis of 'equip' here from 'the gifts' to 'those gifted'. So instead of Christ preparing people with gifts (NIV), Christ now uses those with gifts to equip the church. Perhaps it's not so big a deal as I'm making out - either Christ gave the gifts or those gifted for the sake of the church and it being built up. I do think, though, that the TNIV translation does lend credence to the idea that some gifts have disappeared, because it is person-centred rather than gift-centred.

vs 13

And again, Paul talks of the aim of unity. This time, I think, he is talking about a future thing, possibly an eschatalogical thing. Because the unity he talks about can't really happen on earth. I don't think the church is going to reach the whole measure of the fullness of Christ while on earth. However, it does show that the church is meant to be building up and getting better over time, not weaker and more fractured.

vs 14

This ocean metaphor shows the opinion of ancient people to the sea - it was a chaotic and nasty place. And here it is used as a metaphor for deceptive and false teaching. If I am right, and Paul's last verse is eschatalogical, then we have to assume that the church is always going to be blown around a bit by false teaching until the end times. That's kind of a shame, but it also should be good for us to remember - that we'll never get it 100% right while we're on earth.

vs 15

Ok, to keep my eschatalogical reading here, we need to read this verse as saying that we must continue to speak the truth in love now, so that we grow up into Christ. I think that's fair - we will all become one in Christ Jesus. And yes, we are already there in a sense, but I don't think we can say that we have reached that final destination. Speaking the truth in love, then is our way of combatting the deception of false teaching.

vs 16

So the church now is joined together, it is meant to work together, and it is meant to grow. And it does all these things in Christ. Eventually, it will grow up into fullness so that it is entirely Christ-like. That's the goal.

vs 17

Wow, that's a bold and challenging statement. What does it mean exactly? I think Paul is going to elucidate, but remember that he has stated this broad claim on the life of the Christian church.

vs 18

Nasty verse. It is interesting that all the things that Paul lists - the darkened understanding (dim might be a better word), separate from life in God, ignorant - all of that stems from a hardness of heart. Remember that. Non-Christians aren't non-Christians because of a lack of knowledge. It's not a matter of 'just teach them the gospel, and they will believe'. Baloney. They are hard of heart. And no amount of gospelising will change that. Hard heart = ignorance, not the other way around.

vs 19

Another interesting verse. It is the lack of spiritual sensitivity (the heart being the organ of the spirit) which leads people to indulge in godless passtimes and activities. So when Christians continue in these actions (remember, that is what Paul is actually writing about here), it shows a hardness of heart towards God. A lack of love for God. Ouch - that hurts for all of us who have been or are involved in activities that we know we shouldn't be.

vs 20

That life, the pagan life, is not reflective of the Christian life, which the Ephesians have learned (we assume from Paul). I just want to interject on this short verse and make the point that Paul was teaching not just theology, but a Christian life. I wonder if we, as a church, should be teaching more 'life'?

vs 21

To Paul, teaching about Christ included teaching about life and how to live it. Now this sort of thing is a bit sketchy - I know that some people might thing you've joined a cult if your church told you how to dress and behave. But I think we should be able to maintain a lifestyle plurality without losing the ability to speak into people's lives and actions.

Regardless of plurality or not, though, speaking into the way people live their lives is painful. Making a statement about some truth is one thing - telling people that they should change the way they do something is different. Perhaps that was the problem my old church had with my 'reading the Bible' sermon - because I was telling people to change how they did something?

Ephesians chapter 4

vs 1



Paul obviously thinks that he, in being incarcerated for Christ, has been living a pretty worthwhile life for Christ. I don't think he's calling for them to all go get imprisoned, but he is calling on them to have the right focus.



vs 2



The challenges for Paul in his ministry are probably not exactly the same as the things he is elucidating for the Ephesians. Already we've had a little bit of hint that what they needed to hear about was unity regarding jew and gentile in Christ. Look at the things that Paul is telling them to do to live that life worthy of Christ. It's basically telling them to get along.

vs 3

I've got to admit that these things can be a challenge, especially when there are real issues of concern that are important. But it's during those times that it's all the more important to be at peace with each other.

vs 4

One body - the body of Christ. One Spirit - the Holy spirit. And one hope - which is hope in Jesus as Lord.

vs 5

Just think about how many times Paul is using the word 'one' here. His message is so obviously about unity, which should tell us that the Ephesians were suffering a bit from lack of it.

vs 6

Although God might be diverse in his triune aspect, he is still united in his monotheistic aspect. God is three in one. Not just three, and not just one. But both.

vs 7

It's funny, because I don't often think about grace as being a commodity. I think of it rather as a conceptual thing that just flows out of God endlessly. And yet Paul uses this language regularly. God's not a spendthrift, per se, but he gives us what we need.

vs 8

Oh, is that why it says that in Psalm 68? Of course! I guess I wouldn't have read it that way without Paul explaining it. And I wouldn't suggest we normally do such weird exegesis, but hey, Paul's allowed. It might be that this is following the lines of some sort of rabbinical rules for exegesis. I don't know.

vs 9

O....k.... My brain wants to read this in a logical way and say that Jesus can only have ascended to heaven if he first descended to earth from heaven. That reading seems to make sense to me. But I think there are some others who would read this as meaning that Jesus descended into hell. Not sure if this is the passage they use. They could well also use the passage in 1 Peter about preaching to the demons. My jury is out on this one.

vs 10

Apart from establishing Christ's supremacy over all creation, this verse again stresses the 'filling' role of God, which is a way of describing God's sufficiency, and possibly also his role in maintaining creation. It's God that makes it all tick, if you like. What that has to do with Christ coming to earth (or going to hell) is beyond me though.

Ephesians chapter 3

vs 12

It's worth noting that the NASB and KVJ divide the sentences differently to the NIV and TNIV, which have vs 11 as the beginning of a new sentence including vs 12. This seems to happen a lot in Ephesians.

I've got to say I think the T/NIV reads a lot more easily. And so we end up with this complete idea contained in vs 12, which states that it is only because of Christ that we can approach God, and that in a free and confident way. It's a little more technical too - we have to be 'in Christ', and have faith in Christ too.

vs 13

This links back to the ideas expressed in vs 7-10ish, indicating that since Paul is a servant of God, and since everything is unfolding as part of God's big plan, that they should not be upset about Paul suffering, but instead realise soberly that without it, the Ephesians would never have had God's glory.

vs 14

Obviously in submission (from the previous verses), but also from later verses this seems to be a prayer position too.

vs 15

I've got to say that the note in the TNIV is hugely useful in pointing out that the word for family has a root in the greek word for Father, so you can see that Paul is making a wordplay here. I'm guessing family in heaven is a reference to the trinity? But it could also relate to ancestral families that have since passed on - I don't know if angels have families.

vs 16

God has so much wealth of different kinds at his disposal, that whenever he does something, he does it out of an incredible surplus. So we can always expect him to be generous. Paul certainly seems to expect that. But of course Paul shows openly that he expecting a richness that blesses the 'inner being', rather than the outer wallet.

vs 17

It is through such blessing, then, that Christ dwells in us. And so in a few short verses Paul has again mentioned Christ living in us, and us living in Christ. This process happens by faith, not by any other way. And now Paul's prayer continues, having established this first step, which will provide a foundation in love...

vs 18

So love comes first, then power. But it is not just power for the sake of power, it is power which enables us to better understand love - the love of Christ!

vs 19

Because knowing this love (not just knowing about it, because it surpasses knowledge) is knowing everything about God. All the fullness of God is there contained.

vs 20

I must say my own prayers rarely contain these cool little benedictions. Or doxologies. I can't remember which is which. Basically this one states that no matter how much Paul asks for, God is able to do immeasurably more. You notice then that this is the second time that Paul has had the expectation that God gives generously and overflowingly.

vs 21

And if God does act in such a way, he certainly does deserve glory - and when it says "in the church and in Christ" I think it means because of the church and because of Christ. I guess it could mean that he should be glorified inside the church and inside Christ. I think that's less likely personally.

Ephesians chapter 3

vs 1

I think the most obvious 'reason' that Paul is hearkening back to is his most immediate point - that of the unity of Jew and gentile in the new humanity of Christ. That's probably the only reason he can explain why a Jew would suffer imprisonment for the sake of gentiles.

This verse really is weird, as if he's almost starting a new letter.

vs 2

So God gave his grace to Paul in such a way that it was for the Ephesians! And apparently, they should know about this.

vs 3

Thankfully for us who don't know about it, Paul goes a little deeper, and explains that it was by revelation. He says he has already written briefly about it - either in another letter (which we either don't have or is one of the other church letters) or it is written about previously in this letter, in which is was rather vague and we've hopefully already soaked in the meaning, because this is really the first time we've read about such a revelation.

vs 4

Again with the mystery. And he refers to reading this, which makes me think that the previous reference to written was earlier in the book. The excitement!

But note also that Paul is seeking not to protect the mystery or to gain some sort of authority by it, in a gnostic way. He is trying to break it open so everyone can understand it, and thereby be encouraged by it.

vs 5

The suspense is killing me. Apparently it has killed generations of God-fearing people before Paul! How much do we really realise what a blessed time we live in - where the Spirit is freely available to God's people, where we have so much more truth so much more freely available and understandable? Thank God for that today.

vs 6

Ok, so what's the big mystery? Oh, it's only that gentiles and jews together are God's people because of Jesus. It doesn't sound like a big deal to us. So what? We're all gentiles anyway. But the fact is that, since almost the beginning of history, God has chosen to form a relationship almost exclusively with one group of people. Yes, they were to be priests and examples to the nations, but it was a second-hand message. As a gentile, you had to go to Israel, and they had to be your priest, your mediator, between you and God. What has been offered now is a direct connection between Gentiles and God. It's groundbreaking!

vs 7

Can you be any more vague? We always want to know how these things worked. Did lightning hit you? Did you say "By the power of greyskull"? We do know, in fact, that Paul saw a vision and was struck blind, but we assume that more happened to him that is not recorded.

All this is beside the point because, for Paul, the important things are that through God's power, he received God's grace.

vs 8

Probably he feels like the least of God's people for that little indescretion earlier in his life, in that he tried to wipe out the Christian church. But that to him just makes it all the more gracious of God to give him such an awesome ministry in bringing those from outside God's covenant into his new and better covenant.

vs 9

He also has been given the ministry of making it clear to everyone that this is indeed the right thing to do. So not only is he a missionary, as it were, but he also has the job of mission mobiliser and missiologist. So he reaches people, he teaches the theology of God's mission, and he encourages others to get out there and do it to because, after all, it is God's will.

vs 10-11

Errrr, what now? Does this mean that God is teaching the angels or something a lesson through the church? I guess it does. Does this mean Satan? It could do. And if you think about it that way, it actually sort of makes sense. Satan, the great accuser, comes to God and complains about how all these people are sinners, and so God can't love them, he's got to punish them. And why did God go and create all these non-jews if he's only going to be in relationship with the jews? But God can point to the church and say "Hey, look, my Son died for all that, this is the fulfilment of my awesome historical plan. See how perfect my plan was?" And so Satan gets schooled by God yet again.

Hey, I said sort of.

Ephesians chapter 2

vs 12

So because we were Gentiles, we were hopeless and godless. Ouch. It could be argued that this had less to do with us being gentiles, and more to do with the fact that the Jews weren't keen on reaching gentiles with God's message. Then again, Paul might say that gentiles were excluded from the promises of God until Jesus came, I don't know.

vs 13

He certainly seems to see Christ as the key here. One thing Paul certainly would say, and seems to be saying, is that you couldn't know God and stay as a gentile before now.

vs 14

I think 'the two' are Jews and gentiles. He sees there being a divide, a war between us before Christ.

vs 15

It's so weird to think that Paul is happy stating that the separating element of humanity was "jew" and "non-jew"! That's so now how we think these days. Well, certainly not how I think. The TNIV uses "humanity" instead of "man", which I think is awesome.

This is an interesting focus, though, isn't it? Gives a little insight into the world of the Ephesian church.

vs 16

Not that the division of humanity was not "close to God" and "far away from God" - both jews and non-jews needed Christ's salvation just as much.

vs 17

Jesus didn't actually preach anything in Ephesus. Too far away I guess. But that's not what Paul is saying - he's saying that he preached peace for the sake of those close (jews) and those far away (everyone else).

And this included even the Ephesians.

vs 18

You can't divide God between jews and gentiles. Are you getting sick of the jew/gentile thing yet? I know it's not mega relevant to our lives in Australia. At least, not directly. But knowing that the one God can't be divided among many peoples or cultures is important.

vs 19

Christ's work created a new people, by taking his existing people (Jews, or "God's people" as Paul puts it here) and adding to them gentiles as well. This talk of citizenship is hugely important. It makes God's Kingdom a nation on its own. It redraws the boundaries of God's kingdom from Israel + proselytes vs Gentiles, to Christians vs non-Christians. Not vs in a warlike sense, merely in a dichotomous sense.

vs 20

Does Paul mean the OT prophets, or prophets of his time? I don't know. I would have read it as OT prophets, which creates an interesting idea - that Paul takes the Prophetic summary of the OT as that which primarily relates to the NT gentile Christians, over and above the Law summary of the OT.

Note the importance that the Apostles are accorded here, then - on line with the Prophets. Between the two of them, they are the foundation of the church.

And then, of course, Christ is the head. Or corner.

vs 21

This is the Church, remember, not individual Christians. And not just the Ephesian church, but the Christian Church in its entirety.

vs 22

Still the church, although this time I think Paul is talking specifically to the Ephesians. What a great verse for emphasising the importance of the Church global, but also that the church local has in itself a sort of unshakeable unity. That's one of those Christian mysteries that gets left behind after the trinity and predestination.

Ephesians chapter 2

vs 1

I'm not quite sure where the KJV gets 'quickened' from, or even what it means! Anyway, the rest of the verse is simple enough - although the Ephesians weren't all physically dead, they were spiritually dead, and were headed for both a physical death and a more serious permenant existential death. And that because of sin and transgression. Note the difference - transgression is like crossing a line, so doing something you shouldn't do. Breaking laws and such. Sin is not that. Both are involved in Ephesus.

vs 2

Ok, Paul is setting up not only the ways of the world as part of the problem, but also another ruler, a siritual ruler, who is working in those who are disobedient. Two enemies, the world and the evil spiritual ruler. Both used to be at work in the Ephesians lives.

vs 3

Paul now expands the idea to everyone, at all times. Including himself. Two things mainly - one that we allow the cravings of the sinful nature to be what guides us, and two that we are therefore objects of God's wrath.

vs 4

God loves us, and is great in mercy. This verse is only the opening of a sentence, but already tells us so much.

vs 5

Our life in Christ comes even while still dead in transgressions. Paul adds to this, for emphasis that this is grace - God giving us this favour for nothing we have done.

vs 6

We were dead, but we have been raised? Or is it that Christ ascended up, and we have been raised up with him, seated in the heavenly realms? The second one seems more in context. It's also a contrast between the evil ruler of the air, and Christ, enthroned over all the heavenly realms.

vs 7

God has raised us up so that his grace might be fully expressed in all its value. It's not just the lack of punishment for sins, but also the calling upward to heaven, that makes God's grace so complete.

vs 8

Even our faith is a gift! Salvation by grace and grace alone is what Paul teaches. Although we have value in God's sight and he loves us, we don't do or accomplish anything that causes our salvation. It's all God.

vs 9

As if the previous verse wasn't enough, this is just added on, so that in the negative you can see not only that it's not by work, but also the reason - to prevent boasting.

vs 10

He follows straight up, though, to point out where good works fit into the Christian life. They are a response to God's grace, they are an elected position through God's grace.

vs 11

Paul is starting on a new idea. He wants these Ephesians to remember something. First, though, he wants to clarify that this is in the context of them currently being called "uncircumcised" by people who call themselves "circumcision" - that is, by people who are into cutting off bits of penis.

Ephesians chapter 1

vs 12

So it is that we have been chosen to put our hope in Christ so that God might be glorified.

vs 13

Now here's some weirdness. Paul has been using the term 'we' up until this point, and you think he's being inclusive - him and the Ephesians. But now he says "you also"! I didn't see that coming.

So who was the we? The Apostles? Paul and Barnabas? Or Paul and Silas? He doesn't really make it clear. Regardless, it does include the Ephesians now. And now he focuses on them more, putting stuff in their name, including the Holy Spirit, which he describes as a seal.

vs 14

This featured large in my sermon on adoption - the Holy Spirit is referred to lots as the guarantee which marks us as heirs of God. It's also a down-payment on our redemption. So we are owned by God, but are also his heirs. It's important to note that Paul wants the Ephesians to be aware that there is a time coming when the possession will be redeemed in a final sort of way, and that is all part of God's glory.

vs 15

Ephesus's church obviously had a fairly good rap.

vs 16

Paul's a pray-er. This is meant to be an encouraging thought for them.

vs 17

His thanksgiving prayers don't just end at thanksgiving, though. They then go on to ask for things on behalf of the Ephesians too. Now look here - if I told you that I was praying God would give you a spirit of wisdom and revelation so that you could know him better, would you be offended? If I phrased it the way Paul does, probably not, but my point is that Paul is telling them that they're being prayed for, and what he's praying for them.

vs 18

This one might sound a little more insulting - I'm praying you might know what it is you believe (don't I already?) - but in the context of knowing the treasures of the inheritance, it's probably not so bad. I guess you could interpret 'knowing the riches' as having them.

vs 19

Ok, verse guy, you screwed up in Ephesians. Every single verse is smack bang half way between two sentences, and it's driving me nuts.

Knowing God's power I guess is like knowing his riches - that you get the benefit of it too. The TNIV does well in retranslating 'like' to 'is the same as', so we know that God's 'power' and 'strength' are in fact the same thing.

vs 20

The idea being, then, that Paul wants the Ephesians to know God's power, that is, the same power God used to raise Christ. Which is awesome power.

vs 21

But God didn't stop at resurrecting Jesus - he placed him at the top, above all other powers, particularly spiritual ones in this case. I say that because of the 'heavenly realms' reference in the previous verse, and because it just seems to be what he's talking about. It's the vibe.

vs 22

Why did God do this? Not just for Christ, but for the church! Incredible thought.

vs 23

The reason he did it for the church, though, is that the church is Christ's body, so he did it for the church in that the church is essentially Christ.

What does this thing about fullness filling everything in every way mean? I don't know. I'm open to suggestion here.

Ephesians chapter 1

Luke
Philippians
2 Corinthians
John
1 Corinthians
Galatians
James
2 Timothy
1 Timothy
Philemon
Titus
3John
2John
1John
Jude
2 Thessalonians
1 Thessalonians
2 Peter
1 Peter

And so on to Ephesians...

vs 1

Ahhh, that old familiar intro that we know means we're listening to Paul.

vs 2

Once you've read all of Paul's letters a few times, you understand why old Christian's letters start the same way. It's a simple formula.

vs 3

This seems like such an odd start to the book. Perhaps moreso for those of us who are modern people, and spiritual stuff is a little beyond us. What are these spiritual blessings that we have in the heavenly realms? Perhaps if we read on, we'll be able to unlock this a little better.

vs 4

So our election, or predestination, seems tobe a spiritual blessing. Ok, we're drawing the bow pretty wide. I mean in that way, we're using spiritual to mean theological. Or is Paul saying that we have been chosen, and so will receive spiritual blessings?

vs 5

This sentence either starts "In love" (NIV, TNIV, possibly the NASB although it's missing a full stop and it's so difficult to tell because of all the capital letters) or there is meant to be colon after 'in love' (KJV) and so it becomes a cap to the previous idea. You choose.

Again he talks about our election, but this time it is as sons adopted through Christ. So is that the spiritual blessing he talks about? Our status as adopted children of God? Possibly. Note that this didn't happen by accident - it is part of God's will. And also his pleasure, although I have a feeling that is an old use of the word pleasure, meaning more intention and less enjoyment.

vs 6

Not just grace, but glorious grace! Paul's pretty happy about that grace. And this grace is also freely given to us, again through Christ. Perhaps grace is another spiritual blessing?

vs 7

And that grace leads to redemption, to forgiveness of sins. Now we might think that is certainly a spiritual thing, but whyso? After all, sin is so meaty and fleshy and earthy. And yet it does have an important spiritual component, involving our relationship with God.

vs 8

It's not a mindless lavishing, which is probably more akin to how we lavish things. Instead, it pleases God's full wisdom and understanding of everything that we be lavished with this grace. Giving us grace is a really smart thing for God to do, apparently.

vs 9

Now here's an interesting difference between the TNIV and the NIV - the T wants to put the wisdom and understanding as the first clause of this new idea - so it becomes God's wise and understanding way to reveal to us his will. That is also how the NASB reads it. God's will in this case is purposed in Christ, so it's a specific (albeit fairly huge) part of God's will - the salvation of all people who believe.

vs 10

This is also part of God's will - to bring into unity all things in heaven and on earth. This is a really interesting way of wording this idea - which we can assume is an end-times statement about everything bowing the knee to God, even if unwillingly. Paul saw it as a unity - we tend to see it as a dividing, sheep and goats style.

vs 11

I almost left this verse till tomorrow, because the also is confusing - it sounds like it refers to the choosing, as if we are chosen as well as predestined (as well as elected too earlier on!), where I think those are really all the same thing, and and the also actually refers to the reasoning behind our election, which begins in the next clause in vs 12. So the intervening clause, about us being predestined according to the plans of God in conformity to his will, is really just stuck in between, in a very interrupting sort of way. It's also kinda repetitive. Do you get that feeling from these first few verses? Remember, repetition is the key to remembering, especially in this culture.

Luke chapter 24

vs 44

Jesus didn't just see himself as a saviour dying on the cross to fulfil some philosophical obligation brought about through a logical process. We have to remember that. If we read the NT without its background in the OT, we will never really understand Jesus or our salvation.

vs 45

He did it with a hammer, I expect. Considering how difficult it had been to open their minds before he died.

vs 46

Now, obviously that's not just a verse in the OT - those concepts (the Messiah, his suffering, his death and his resurrection) are spread over the OT in little verses we would not otherwise catch, especially in a simple reading of the OT.

vs 47

Again, these concepts of sin, and repentance and forgiveness of it, only have any meaning to us because of the OT. And again, these are not simple ideas, they are built up over time.

vs 48

And if you look at it, everything he's said (bar the preaching to the nations) has been done. So they are witnesses of it.

vs 49

What did the Father promise? The Holy Spirit of course. When did he promise it? In the Old Testament, along with all these other things! And if God has been faithful all the way, then they should sit tight in Jerusalem and wait for it.

vs 50

I don't know if Bethany as a place has any specific specialness for this event. I know it's where Jesus was anointed and where he entered Jerusalem. Perhaps that's it - he's leaving from the same place he entered?

vs 51

Which must have been totally trippy. We don't really know how or why or what. But you certainly get the idea that he is being taken back to heaven.

vs 52

Whereas the death of Jesus was a sad moment, and the resurrection of Jesus was a confusing moment, the ascension of Jesus is a joyous and praiseworthy moment! I don't think we remember this enough. We talk about Jesus death a lot, about his resurrection a little bit (even this I think we should talk about more) and his ascension not really. We might say something like "and now he's in heaven at the right hand of God, speaking on our behalf" or something, but we don't explain that, unlike most people, he didn't die again to get there.

vs 53

The temple was the place to be as the earliest group of Christians. What else do you do? It's the same God you're worshipping, and Jesus spoke at the temple all the time.

I might just point out that this is where Luke ends, but it is by no means the end of the story. Luke, in that way, is really the most complete of the gospels, because it goes on to Acts, which then tells us all about the early church. It's often called (and treated) as Luke-Acts. Will I go on to Acts next? Hmmm...