Categories
Bible Study Guides

Messiah: Head Over All Things

[Notes and Resources for A Sunday School class I Teach]

I pray… that you may know what is the hope of his calling, and what are the riches of the glory of his inheritance among the saints.

Paul, apostle of Messiah Jesus

Introduction and Ephesians 1

This study guide was developed for youth Sunday School at my home church. The assignment was “Biblical Distinctives: The gospel and salvation, separation from the world, and the head covering.”

I use Ephesians as the primary text since it integrates the themes of gospel, salvation, separation, and headship.

The Gospel and our salvation is based on the victory and kingship of Messiah, who has brought us redemption as the forgiveness of our sins.

  • Christ (Messiah) is now reigning, and we share that reign.
  • The Spirit “seals” us as Messiah’s people and is the first installment (arrabon) of the inheritance.
  • The riches of his glorious inheritance among the saints astound—the Kingdom of God in full.

Believers are set apart as saints in light and do not partner with deeds of darkness.

Christ is head of the church and of everything. Any other application of headship must be understood in that light.

  1. Running course assignment: Read or listen to the entire letter at one time or at least in one day. Do this at least twice over the course of the study in at least two translations.
  2. Read Ephesians 1 and identify as many descriptors of separation, salvation, gospel, and headship as you can.
  3. Paul prays that they may have wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Christ so that they can grasp what three things? (Ephesians 1: 17-19)

Before God, After God Ephesians 2

Ephesians chapter two divides nicely into parallel situations which powerfully describe life before the gospel, what God did (the gospel), and life after the gospel. In class we will fill out this table. Creating or filling out your own is a powerful way to observe key themes in Galatians.

Ephesians 2:1-10Ephesians 2:11-22
Before…
But God…
After…

The Spirit and the Inheritance

Central to the gospel of our salvation is our king, the Christ. He brings marvelous gifts, the Spirit and (now partially) the inheritance (Ephesians 1:13-14).

The Spirit serves as God’s identifying seal, which marks believers. The spirit also brings Jesus kingship to bear among his people. It is the first installment of the kingdom which is to be our inheritance.

AlreadyNot Yet
First InstallmentInheritance
SpiritInherit the Kingdom
InauguratedEschatology
The Already / Not yet in Ephesians 1
  • Ephesians 1:13-14
  • Ephesians 4:30
  • Ephesians 5:18-19

How does the choosing and predestination in Ephesians 1:4-5 and Ephesians 1:11 relate to the Spirit’s role as seal and down payment of the inheritance?

One theological angle would run roughly as follows: God picked out certain specific persons before creation, and independently of anything he might know about their future choices adn chose these people to be his saints. He predestined these specific people to be his adopted children manifesting his glory. The sealing with the Holy Spirit functions as a guarantee that this position of sainthood and sonship cannot ever be undone. (This would correspond to the traditional Calvinist points of unconditional election, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints.)

Contrary to this Calvinist interpretation of Ephesians, many believers insist that humans (at least those who have heard the gospel) have a genuine option as to whether or not they will be among God’s chosen ones, that all humans have the ability to resist and reject the grace of God, and that (tragically) some saints fail to persevere to the end. These views are supported by common sense readings of the stories, invitations, and warnings of scripture. Does Ephesians contradict these beliefs?

Before getting dogmatic about this set of theological claims we should take a closer look at what specificly Ephesians says about choosing, predestination, the seal, and the inheritance.

Filling All Things: The King and His Body

God gave Jesus as head over all things to the assembly, which is Jesus’ body and the fullness of him who fills all things in every way.

Paul, Apostle of Messiah Jesus

We are used to thinking in terms of a good heaven, unspoiled by evil, and an earth in which the struggle takes place. But the book of Revelation gives us an entirely different view. Satan’s abode was in heaven, until he was cast down, not directly by his sin, but by the Lamb’s victory. Therefore heaven no less than earth has been corrupted by evil. …The chief forces of evil are heavenly creatures.

González and González, Vision at Patmos, 108–9

Compare this piece from John Piper (text and audio)

  1. Read the following sections of Ephesians: 1:15-23, 2:18-20, 3:8-11, 4:6-16, 6:10-12, 6:18-20.
  2. What is the Kingdom of God? “Heaven” where we go when we die? A millennium between the church age and the final judgement? Whenever people do what God wants them to do?
  3. How do we participate in filling all things?

God’s kingship in (at least) 8 stages:

  • Creation
  • Exodus
  • David
  • Jesus’ Ministry
  • Jesus Death and Resurrection
  • Pentecost
  • The Church in mission and maturity
  • The Inheritance

The Gospel of Peace: Jesus creates one new humanity

The unity of the Christian fellowship is not a mere matter of theory. It is a reality which must be realized within the brotherhood on the local as well as on the inter-community level. The welcoming hand of the church must reach across all social barriers with the call of the Gospel to include all who repent into the fellowship of the church.

Guy Hershberger, “The Way of the Cross in Human Relations” ch. 22. Quoted in Rebekah Mui “Racism and the Way of the Cross” https://kingdomoutpost.org/racism-and-the-way-of-the-cross/

Does the universal church consist of a set of culturally homogeneous groups that exist separately side by side until they finally get to rub shoulders in front of God’s throne at the end of time, or are those cultural boundaries supposed to be transcended on earth at the most local level? 

Anika Fast in Reclaiming Mission
https://open.spotify.com/episode/1qxDTgeSVg6W63i6ETqE90?si=M0S1NTABQY-huyY1r6akbA&fbclid=IwAR34ABkDMtCdeWeqq9ZFw4-4KxOG9RPkoQHoSYka1pmTa8x82x74a4nmBW0&nd=1
https://open.spotify.com/episode/3lZv2ugQ8LvSgCwzNUngVR
What priority do we put on churches reflecting a cross section of the population rather than different churches for different ethnicities?

What was the deep problem with not being part of Israel? Were all non-Israelites damned?

How does God create a new People?

What is the difference between the Law, which had to be  set aside to bridge the cultural divide, and the prohibition of  porneia (sexual immorality) which Gentiles had to embrace as part of the new humanity? How do we distinguish attempts to impose mere culture on others from upholding the culture of the Kingdom that comes from being clothed with Christ?

Eleven o-clock Sunday morning has been famously said to be the most segregated hour in American life. (1950’s and 1960’s) Is that phenomenon of serious concern?

Living as the “Co-enlivened” and “Sealed”

No Partnership with Darkness: Separation from the world in Ephesians

Money Modesty and Body Modesty

  • Primary emphasis: Avoid any hint of, or the slightest endorsement of, the sins which bring wrath on the “sons of disobedience.”[1]
  • Secondary emphasis: Every pornos, impure person, and pleonektes is excluded from inheriting the Kingdom and subject to the wrath of God.

[1] “Sons of disobedience” –the ones in whom the prince of the power of the air is working—they do the willings of their flesh and thoughts. Compare 2:1-4

  1. What three sins are listed as things that “must not even be named among you” as God’s holy ones (vs. 3)? Where else are these same sins listed in the selection?
  • The various forms of evil speech inv verse 4 presumably connect to the sins which must not be named among us and which keep one from inheriting the kingdom of God. The most obvious example would be what we term “dirty jokes.” What other speech forms result in playing with or “naming” these sins?
  • There are many references to light, to what is pleasing, acceptable, or God’s will, and to what is wise. What clues are in the passage to help us flesh out what a light filled, wise, acceptable to God life looks like? Be specific.
  • What is the practical alternative to being partners with the “sons of disobedience”? How can you “expose” evil deeds without “mentioning” them?

Can someone enlivened and enthroned by God and sealed with the Spirit as a pledge of the inheritance still revert to being a pornos, an impure person, or a pleonektes?

The meaning of separation can be thought of with four S’s

  • Special to God
    • Set Apart, Holy, Chosen, Saints
    • This is foundational across both Testaments.
  • Symbols
    • Sabbath, Circumcision, Blue Fringes, Purification, Cleanness
    • This figured large under the Law.
  • Social
    • Marry in the Lord, Don’t choose fools as your best buddies, Avoid schismatic teachers, don’t associate with those who claim Christianity but walk in sexual immorality, greed, or slander
    • Listed social dimensions of separation that remain in the New Testament. Old Testament had more social separation because of symbolic separation.
  • Sin Avoidance
    • No Partnership with Sexual Immorality, Greed, or Slander.
    • This is the primary manifestation of separation in the New Testament.

The Concept of Holiness

What is the difference between holiness and righteousness? What kinds of things can be holy but can not be righteous? Pots, pans, and clothing are a few examples. It makes sense to speak of holy garments, but not of righteous garments. The Sabbath day was holy, and to be treated as holy; but the sabbath was not righteous. Righteousness can describe the character, actions, and relationships of persons, divine or human. Holiness can describe persons, but also physical items, offerings, and holidays (holy days).

The core idea of holiness is that something is set apart for a special purpose. It is not “common” but holy and so must be treated with utmost respect. Think of the fence around Mt. Sinai before God spoke, or think of the requirement to wash clothes and abstain from sexual relations in the leadup to the giving of the ten commandments. Think of the “Holy of Holies” in the tabernacle which could only be entered by the high priest once a year. Think of the death penalty for picking up sticks on the Sabbath.

The prophets thunder, however, that such external holiness as this, without righteousness is a vile mockery.  God says, in the words of Isaiah, “I cannot endure iniquity and solemn assembly.” “Bring no more vain offerings.” (Chapter 1) Treating the things of the temple carefully and following the protocols for the Lord’s offering is of no avail when righteousness is lacking, when we rob, steal, extort, oppress etc.

“Saint” and “holy” are the same word (Greek hagios). Most English Bibles render it as holy when used as an adjective (You must be holy), but as saints when it is used to as a plural substantive to name a group of people (the inheritance of the saints).

As with holiness more generally the idea is of being set apart or consecrated for God. The designation saints is not just a statement about the morality or righteousness of believers (though it is that), but a statement of God’s choosing and valuing them as a special group.

Righteousness is moral correctness but it has strong relational dimensions, rightly related to others, and in some cases, especially in the Psalms, comes close to the meaning of loyalty. Justification is often described primarily as right standing with God and that is definitely part of the meaning of justification.

Texts: Exodus 19 and 20 Isaiah 1:1-23

In the Old Testament there is a lot of emphasis on Holiness as cultural distinction, and proper ritual and symbolism However, the Old Testament is also clear such “outward” holiness apart from justice in relationships with others is not acceptable holiness before God.

The New Testament shifts the emphasis even further toward holiness as practicing justice with others before God and greatly reduces the ceremonial aspects of holiness. However, even in the New Testament holiness cannot be reduced to simply practicing justice or morality.

The Blue Fringe Principle or the Doctrine of Affected Dissimilarity

I am not anabaptist but I attend a Mennonite church for the past 6 weeks. The draw I have is the outward look the brethren have is a witness to their faith. The women are obvious. The men can hide it if they want to but the gentlemen in this church don’t. It has been a draw for me and helped me with my concept of a world view versus a biblical view.

Karl Stine commenting on YouTube

What in the World Are We Separate From?

There are two terms in the Greek NT sometimes rendered “world” in our English bibles. One is kosmos “world”, and the other is aionos “age.” In Ephesians 2:2 both terms are piled together “the age of this world” (NRSV “course of this world”; HCSB “the ways of this world”)

Teaching about separation from the world often assumes that the audience shares the speaker’s assumptions about what fits into the category of “worldly.” In various contexts this might be alcoholic beverages, blue jeans, cowboy boots, instrumental music, working on Sunday, sporty vehicles, movies, dancing, tv, living in town, driving cars, bowling alleys, theatres, ice rinks, off-roading, atv’s, drinking coffee, celebrating Christmas or any number of other things. This background understanding is convenient for the preacher. He need not make a case against blue jeans or bowling alleys, he can simply talk about separating ourselves from worldly things and trust his audience to fill in the blanks. Of course, this doesn’t work so well when the audience has a quite different impression of what counts as worldly. The approach of this study is not to rely on background assumptions about what counts as worldly, but to work out the idea of separation from Biblical texts.

For a helpful discussion of the abuse of the term “worldly” listen to this episode from Think-Truth.org https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/how-we-get-worldliness-wrong/id1542710155?i=1000566703156 In part two, they follow up with their take on what exactly wordliness is. https://open.spotify.com/episode/2lEmPES4pmixBH76gBOKwK?si=14bac3317a2e4c69&fbclid=IwAR3CFlfGbdWNAFL5ChU3Css2GBun7SSwXfen2HpWM8mN8r_ksFyIp9BdjL0&nd=1

0

"Wordliness" has had many definitions in Christian circles. Based on your perception of your church growing up, which of the following were considered worldly?

What is Headship?

“Head” is used in the Septuagint to refer to the capital city in a country and the king located in that city. (Isaiah 7:8-9)

Colossians: Used of Christ

Ephesians: Used of Christ and husbands

1 Corinthians: Used of God (The Father), Christ, and Men/Husbands

Ephesians 1:20-23; Colossians 1:15-18

Ephesians 4:15-16; Colossians 2:8-19

Ephesians 5:22-30; 1 Corinthians 11:3-12

[compare headship ideas in Ephesians and women passages in other epistles]

  1. Headship versus authority
    1. Does being “head” over someone always entail having authority over them?
    1. Many relations of authority do not involve headship in the robust sense it is used in Ephesians and 1 Corinithians. A mother has authority over her children but she is not their head. Elders in the church have authority over others but they are not the head of the church or of individuals in the church. Christ is the head not just of mankind in general but of every man. Describe what headship involves in addition to having some level of authority

The Main Line of Argument in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16

The sister’s veiling is a historic Christian practice which is elaborated in the New Testament in 1 Corinthians 11:1-14. However, few American churches practice it, and the result is that churches that do practice it have generally had to put a lot of emphasis on demonstrating that the scripture indeed teaches it. Bible scholars who do not wish to insist on its practice have come up with various explanations that, they claim, show that Paul in 1 Corinthians 11 was only giving specific advice for a specific situation.

The primary goal of this unit is to push you to wrestle through the details of the passage to reach an understanding of the purpose and meaning of this Christian practice.

The central rationale for covering and uncovering rests on two principles.

  1. Of every man the head is Christ and the head of a woman is the man (=her husband?)
  2. (A) man is the image and glory of God while (a) woman is the glory of man being made from man and on account of man.  (with the clarification that neither is independent of the other in the Lord)

While there is much that is puzzling about this passage it is clear that the physical observance of covering and uncovering is based on those two fundamental realities.

Texts

1 Corinthians 11:2-16

Genesis 1:26-28; 2:18-25; 5:1-3

1 Timothy 2:8-15

Puzzling Questions

  • Headship head or anatomical head?
    • Verse three lays out three headship relations. We then learn that we should do(or avoid doing) certain things with our anatomical heads because of these headship relations. Label each occurrence of the word “head” after verse three either as “anatomical” or with the appropriate headship head. I.e. there are four possibilities for filling out verse 4 (some of them are obviously incorrect)
      • Every man who prays or prophesies with Christ uncovered dishonors Christ
      • Every man who prays or prophesies with his anatomical head uncovered dishonors Christ
      • Every man who prays or prophesies with Christ uncovered dishonors his anatomical head
      • Every man who prays or prophesies with his anatomical head uncovered dishonors his anatomical head
  • General relationship between men and women versus specific relationship between a husband  and a wife. Which is in focus in this passage? Do single women have a human head?
  • What does it mean to have “authority on ones head”.
    • Most translations take authority here as a reference to covering “a symbol of authority on her head”. What is the authority symbolized here?
      • Her authority (authorization, right) to pray and prophesy?
      • The authority her head has over her?
    • Who are the “angels” ?
      • Human messengers from other churches
      • Godly angels
      • Fallen angels
    • What do the angels have to do with covering?

Common but not particularly compelling objections.

This passage does not teach any covering other than full length hair. What Paul is arguing for is either simply that women continue a cultural practice so as not to offend the sensibilities of those around them or else it is simply a culturally specific way of expressing the more general principle he is really concerned with.

Practical Questions about Covering and Uncovering

{Polls will be available here at the proper time.}

Why do you think most churches the consistently practice covering and uncovering, extend it beyond specific times of prayer and prophecy? (i.e. why do most churches that practice covering and uncovering treat it as something to be done all day long (at least for women), rather than just something to do at church and during devotional times?)


[1] Consider this quote from Finny Kuruvilla: “The age at which a woman would begin [to cover her head] would sensibly correspond to the age at which she properly begins to be able to make spiritual exercises such as prayer and prophecy. Parents may choose an earlier age for their daughters for the sake of modesty.” King Jesus Claims His Church. Anchor-Cross Publishing, 2013. p196.

Categories
Bible Study Guides

When We Don’t Know Exactly What the Bible Says

This bible is missing verses! Differences between translations reduce our confidence in the Bible!

Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty should somewhat be shaken.

Preface to the KJV

Copies of the Bible Differ.

Some believers find this troubling. Some unbelievers think it shows the Bible is untrustworthy. In this study, you will look at various examples of where we don’t know exactly what the Bible says and reflect on the implications. At the end I will give you the KJV preface response to the idea that bibles shouldn’t have footnotes.

Different Differences

Single word changes can make a big difference. One early edition of the KJV infamously read:

Thou shalt commit adultery.

Exodus 20:14
  1. Is this a troubling error?
  2. Is it difficult to determine the true reading of the passage?

What about the following discrepancy? This exists between copies of the KJV and also between various modern translations.

he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her: and she went into the city.

he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her: and he went into the city.

Ruth 3:15-16

Scholars are unsure which reading is original. The NIV reads “he” but gives this footnote “Most Hebrew manuscripts; many Hebrew manuscripts, Vulgate and Syriac she.” The NKJV reads “she” but gives this footnote “Many Heb. mss., Syr., Vg. she; MT, LXX, Tg. he.”

  1. Does the variant change the meaning of the passage?
  2. Does it trouble you?

Here is an example showcasing a rare textual footnote in the 1611 KJV.

And when he had taried among them more then ten dayes, hee went downe vnto Cesarea,

And when he had taried among them no more then eight or ten dayes, hee went downe vnto Cesarea,

Acts 25:6 KJV and KJV margin.

The note to the 1611 KJV reads “Or as some copies reade, no more then eight or ten dayes.”

  1. True or False(defend your answer): “If the KJV translators would have chosen the reading mentioned in the margin, that would prove that they did not believe the Word of God, and the translation they produced would be a perversion of the word of God.”

A Maybe more Scary Difference

The previous examples may seem trivial, an easily recognizable typo or minor differences in the details of stories. But the last two are examples of differences in the handwritten copies of scripture (manuscripts) that have come down to us. How you answered the questions above affects how you deal with bigger discrepancies. So let’s jump to one of the biggest.

Some copies of the gospel of Mark end at 16:8 while most include another section known as 16:9-20. Since most copies include this ending section, we might conclude that the copies missing it simply did not get finished. But matters are not quite this simple. For one thing, the manuscripts lacking it are quite early and generally important witnesses to the original text, second there does a exist an alternative ending for the gospel of Mark. Somebody wrote another short passage to write up the gospel of Mark. Third, the ending passage (9-20) is clearly a different section. There is an abrupt stylistic shift from the first part of chapter 16.

Several opinions exist regarding the ending of Mark.

  • Mark originally ended abruptly at 16-8 and two different endings were attached later.
  • The original ending for Mark, was lost and two different endings were attached later (neither of which was original)
  • 9-20 is the original ending of Mark.

Among those who do not think verses 9-20 are part of the original text of Mark, there are two approaches. Some would say that verses 9-20 are not part of scripture because Mark did not write them. Others argue that they were accepted early enough and widely enough that we should treat them as part of scripture, even if they were not part of the original book of Mark.

  1. How does the uncertainty surrounding this passage affect your view of scripture?
  2. How important is figuring out the exact text of scripture in places where there are variants?
    1. Doesn’t matter unless you are a Bible translator.
    2. Of minor importance.
    3. We should do our best, but not be too worried if we are wrong.
    4. Potentially a big deal.
    5. Very important! We must know the exact text everywhere!
  3. What should we teach new believers and children about textual variations? How important is it for everyone to understand the basics of how biblical texts were transmitted?

Wisdom from the KJV Preface

Here is more of the opening quote (abridged). It comes from §16 of the preface to the KJV

Some peradventure would have no variety of senses to be set in the margin, lest the authority of the Scriptures for deciding of controversies by that show of uncertainty should somewhat be shaken.
But we hold their judgement not to be so sound in this point.
For though whatsoever things are necessary are manifest, yet for all that it cannot be dissembled ((disguised)), that partly to exercise and whet our wits, partly to wean the curious from loathing of them for their everywhere plainness, partly also to stir up our devotion to crave the assistance of God’s Spirit by prayer, and lastly, that we might be forward to seek aid of our brethren by conference, it hath pleased God in His divine providence here and there to scatter words and sentences of that difficulty and doubtfulness…
Now in such a case, doth not a margin do well to admonish the reader to seek further, and not to conclude or dogmatize upon this or that peremptorily?

KJV Preface (excerpted, emphasis mine)

Suggested Reading

Vince Beiler on the Hebrew Bible. https://anabaptistperspectives.org/series/adventures-hebrew-bible

The Translator to the Reader (KJV Preface) https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(King_James)/Preface

Dan Wallace’s comments on “Aren’t the Copies of the Bible Hopelessly Corrupt?” https://danielbwallace.com/2014/03/24/can-we-still-believe-the-bible/

Dan Wallace’s four way grid for New Testament variants is helpful. Some are viable but not meaningful, some are meaningful but not viable, some are neither viable nor meaningful, and a small percentage are both meaningful and viable. See for example: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justin-taylor/interview-with-daniel-b-wallace-part-4/ or this podcast interview: