behindthewillowtrees » Living in the Power of God

What's wrong with the Gnostic Gospels

John Smith — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 23:17:00 +0000

I was recently asked what sources can we use to ‘prove’ our belief that the Gnostic Gospels are unreliable. It’s a good question and one which is relatively straightforward to answer. The Gnostic Gospels have been rejected since the very earliest days of the church. The early church accepted the four NT gospels because they were written by apostles who had met Jesus or their immediate associates. The apostles were the only authoritative eyewitnesses of Jesus. No other so-called gospels fit these criteria.

1. Jesus gave his apostles, the twelve and Paul, the authority to be his witnesses (Mk.3:13-19, Matt.10:1-8). They were eyewitnesses of his resurrection (Lk.24:33-44, Jn.20:24, Acts 1:1-3). They understood who he was and were promised the power of the Holy Spirit so that they might teach the truth (Lk.24:44-49, Jn.14:26). Jesus appointed Paul on the Damascus Road to be the thirteenth apostle and made him an eyewitness of his resurrection (Acts 26:13-18, 1 Cor.15:1-8, Gal.1:1, 11-12).

2. The early church declared that these first apostles were the only people who had authority to write about Jesus.

Clement c.95
“The apostles have preached the gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ: Jesus Christ has done so from God. Christ therefore was sent forth by God, and the apostles by Christ.” (1 Clement 42.1)

Ignatius c.105
Study, therefore, to be established in the doctrines of the Lord and the apostles. (Magnesians, 13)

Polycarp c. 117
“Let us therefore so serve Him (God) with fear and all reverence as He Himself gave commandment and the apostles who preached the gospel to us and the prophets who proclaimed beforehand the coming of our Lord.” (Philippians 6)

Irenaeus c.180
“For the Lord of all gave to his apostles the power of the gospel through whom also we have known the truth, that is, the doctrine of the Son of God (Against Heresies 3.5)…The apostles, likewise being disciples of the truth, are above all falsehood ” (Against Heresies 3 Preface)

3. The early church certain there was only one standard of truth and orthodoxy which had been passed on from the first apostles.

Irenaeus c.180
In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us. And this is most abundant proof that there is one and the same life-giving faith, which has been preserved in the church from the apostles until now, and handed down in truth. (Against Heresies 3.3)

Tertullian c.197
The apostles were ignorant of nothing and they preached nothing that contradicted one another. (Against Heretics 25)

4. The four NT Gospels were written soon after the resurrection of Jesus and then accepted by the early church as the only authoritative gospels from the apostles and their associates. Matthew and John were apostles, Mark and Luke worked closely with Paul and Peter (Col.4:14, 1 Pet.5:13).

5. The early church leaders from the resurrection to the end of the second century formed a succession of those who personally handed down the truth and the gospels from the apostles. E.g. John the Apostle (d. 95AD) —— Polycarp (69-155AD) —— Irenaeus (130-200AD).

Polycarp c. 117
“Let us therefore so serve Him (God) with fear and all reverence as He Himself gave commandment and the apostles who preached the gospel to us and the prophets who proclaimed beforehand the coming of our Lord.” (Philippians 6)

Irenaeus about Polycarp c. 180
Polycarp also was instructed by apostles, and he spoke with many who had seen Christ. Not only that, but by apostles, in Asia he was appointed bishop of the church in Smyrna. I also saw him in my early youth, for he lived a very long time. When he was a very old man, he gloriously and most nobly suffered martyrdom and departed this life. He had always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the church has handed down, and which alone are true(Against Heresies 3.3.4)…he would speak of his familiar relations with John, and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord. He would call their words to remembrance. So Polycarp received it in this manner from the eyewitnesses of the Word of life. Whatever things he had heard from them respecting the Lord (concerning both His miracles and His teaching), he would recount—all in harmony with the Scriptures.(Florinus 2)

6. The early church rejected the Gnostic Gospels because they contradicted the teaching of the apostles.

Ignatius c. 105
How much more will this be the case with anyone who by wicked doctrine corrupts the faith of God, for which Jesus Christ was crucified! Such a one becomes defiled. He will go away into everlasting fire, and so will everyone that listens to him (Ephesians 16)…But if, as some that are without God, that is, the unbelieving, say, He became man in appearance [only], that He did not in reality take unto Him a body, that He died in appearance [merely], and did not in very deed suffer, then for what reason am I now in bonds, and long to be exposed to the wild beasts? In such a case, I die in vain, and am guilty of falsehood against the cross of the Lord. (Trallians 10)

Irenaeus c.180
How the Valentinians pervert the Scriptures to support their own pious opinions…This, then, is their system, which neither the prophets announced, nor the Lord taught, nor the apostles delivered. However, they boast that they have a perfect knowledge, beyond all others. They gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures. (Against Heresies 1.8)

Irenaeus c.180
These things being so, all who destroy the form of the Gospel are vain, unlearned, and also audacious; those, [I mean, ] who represent the aspects of the Gospel as being either more in number than as aforesaid, or, on the other
hand, fewer. The former class [do so], that they may seem to have discovered more than is of the truth; the latter, that they may set the dispensations of God aside. (Against Heresies 3.9)

Irenaeus c.180
On the other hand, those who are from Valentinus are altogether reckless. They create their own Scriptures, boasting that they possess more Gospels than there really are. Indeed, they have gone to such a degree of audacity, as to entitle their comparatively recent writing the Gospel of Truth though it agrees in nothing with the Gospels of the Apostles so that they have really no gospel which is not full of blasphemy. (Against Heresies 3.9)

Irenaeus c.180
“Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas.” (Against Heresies 1.31)

Origen c.254
“I know a certain gospel which is called “The Gospel according to Thomas” and a “Gospel according to Matthias” and many others have we read – lest we should in any way be considered ignorant of those who imagine they possess some knowledge if they are acquainted with these. Nevertheless, among all these we have approved solely what the church has recognized, which is that only four gospels should be accepted.” (Homily on Luke 1:1)

7. The early church stated that the four NT gospels refute the Gnostic Gospels.

Irenaeus c.180
The Ebionites, who use only Matthew’s Gospel, are refuted out of this very same work, making false suppositions with regard to the Lord. But Marcion, mutilating the Gospel according to Luke, is still proved to be a blasphemer of the only existing God, from those passages which he still retains. Those, again, who separate Jesus from Christ, alleging that Christ remained impassible, but that it was Jesus who suffered, prefer the Gospel by Mark. However, if they read it with a love of truth, they would have their errors rectified. Those persons, moreover, who follow Valentinus, make copious use of the Gospel according to John to illustrate their conjunctions. However, they, too, will be proved to be totally in error. (Against Heresies 3.7)

9. The Gnostic Gospels were written more than 125 years after Jesus’ death when all the eyewitnesses were gone. The four Gospels were written within 50 years of Jesus’ death by eyewitnesses or their close associates while other eyewitnesses were still living.

Ben Witherington, Professor of New Testament at Asbury Theological Seminary
“Before we turn to these documents, it is important to state a crucial principle of historical study: It is always more likely that those sources that come from eyewitnesses or those who were in contact with eyewitnesses will provide us with the best data about an ancient person than documents that were composed several centuries later, as were the Gnostic Gospels. There would need to be clear and compelling evidence corroborated by several later sources for us to take the word of later documents that Jesus was married. There is no such evidence, even in the Gnostic Gospels.” (The Gospel Code, p.32)

“The essential question is, ‘What were the earliest documents (and what do they say)?’ The answer is the New Testament itself. We have no documents earlier than these, and as any good historian knows, the documents closest to the source of a movement are likely to be most revealing about its origins. The documents written by eyewitnesses or those in contact with eyewitnesses are our primary sources, and these documents happen to be in the New Testament, plus a few other likely first-century documents, such as the Didache and 1 Clement.” (The Gospel Code, p.118)

Living in the Power of God (4)

John Smith — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 10:30:00 +0000

Signs and wonders of the gospel
Romans 15.13-22

1. A life overflowing with the power of God (v13)

Overflowing with joy and peace (Gal 5.22-23, Rms 5.1)
Overflowing with trust and faith (Rms 1.17)
Overflowing with hope
Hope for today
Hope for our future
Hope for all creation

Overflowing with the Holy Spirit

A life able to gloriously serve others (v14-16)

Service which springs from maturity (v14)
Goodness or kindness
Knowledge
Application and admonish

These verses come at the end of a long section of Romans devoted to how the strong relate to the weak in the faith. There are at least three themes which are central to the way we serve each other. Firstly, God has accepts those who are weak in their faith (14.3), Jesus accepts us (15.7), therefore we should accept one another. How could it be otherwise! Secondly, we all share a relationship with Christ based on his Lordship. Individually, we are accountable to him for our lives, strong and weak (14.6). No one is special! Or rather we are all equally special. Thirdly, it is Jesus who is our coming judge. It is therefore not our role to judge others.

Rather than pointing the finger, we can be much more positive in our service of others. Paul argues that we need to do everything by faith and be fully convinced about it (14.5). So to be competent to “instruct one another” has an important purpose. We can help each other to educate our thinking with the Word of God. Stott suggests that this will bring settled convictions and so build Christian liberty. We need to honour, serve and respect others.

But what happens when Christians simply disagree over what is right teaching. There are plenty of these issues. One of the old puritan expressions which can be helpful is:

In essentials unity
In non-essentials liberty
In all things charity.

But isn’t one person’s essential, another’s non-essential? Certainly we cannot be so unprincipled that we accept any view or opinion. We cannot simply adopt the mantra of 21st century liberal society, that the only intolerance allowed is towards intolerance. Christianity is in many respects an intolerant faith. Jesus said he was the way, truth and life and that no-one comes to God except by him. That’s pretty inclusive.

A safe guide is where Scripture speaks clearly then these are essentials. But when serious Bible believing Christians genuinely reach different views, then these ought to be considered non-essentials. That then clarifies how we relate to people hold these two kinds of view. Stott helpfully suggests that:

In [essentials] faith is primary and we not appeal to love as an excuse to deny essential faith.
In [non-essentials] love is primary and we may not appeal to zeal for faith as an excuse for failures in love.
Faith instructs our conscience; love respects the conscience of others.
Faith gives liberty; love limits its exercise.

Service which springs from clear vision (v15)

Service which springs from worship and witness (v16)

Paul uses a somewhat surprising expression: He has a priestly duty to proclaim the gospel. He definitely means this! In the NT, the term relates to both the Jewish priesthood and Jesus’ high priestly role. A priestly duty must mean something to do with sacrificial rites, and Paul links that to the Gentiles being an acceptable offering.

For Paul, and therefore us, mission is indeed a priestly activity. We bring converts as living sacrifices to God (12.1). Such people become of themselves an acceptable offering to God. No longer do they need to rely on the sacrifice of animals and the action of a priestly office. They can come to God without the intervention of others.

Christians engaged in mission are exercising a priestly ministry. It is this ministry which links the worship with witness. Too often churches and Christians elevate one over the other or see them a separate tasks. As priests we worship God, and as priests we reach out to others. No wonder Peter described the church as a royal priesthood.

A life that fully proclaims the gospel (v17-22)

In obeying God
In speaking only about Jesus (1 Cor 2.3-5)
An afterthought: David Taylor rightly suggests that not only does Paul speak more and more about his weakness in presenting the gospel as he gets older in the faith, and is more acutely aware of the worthlessness of his own righteousness, but he even describes himself in increasingly humble terms; from being an “apostle of Christ Jesus”, to “a servant of God”, to “a prisoner of Christ”. A useful study on Christian maturity.
In actions and words
In signs and wonders (2 Cor 12.12)
In the power of the Spirit (Eph 6.17)
In pioneering mission (Is 52.15; 1 Cor 3:6,10)

Cell Outline

Why does Paul pray in v13 for God to fill us with belief so that we may abound in hope? Why is hope so important to the Christian?

What are the points that Paul has written about boldly in v15? Try and explain in what way is mission a priestly duty?

What does the passage from v14-21 reveal about Paul’s heart and what was important to him?

Describe an occasion when you have seen God moving in signs and wonders (v19). What mission opportunities were created? How might mission based on experiencing the power of God be different from debating the gospel (Acts 17.22ff)

What prevented Paul from going to see the church at Rome (v22)? From 1 Thess 2:18 , how can we be aware of the times when Satan is actively trying to keep us from accomplishing something?

Going deeper:
Is it good to ask for prayers for yourself? How do you feel when the answer is no? What kinds of prayer focus are most likely to be answered?

Look on to the next section v23-33. Why was it important for Paul to go to Spain in v24? In Acts 23:11, Paul has a promise from God that he will go to Rome. but he also seems confident that he would go to Spain. What can we learn about making plans from this?

What can we learn about Paul from his prayer request in vv30-32? What can we learn about how God wants us to pray to Him?

How can we square the issue of planning ahead with the knowledge that nothing can happen apart from the will of God (Romans 1:10).

Living in the Power of God (3)

John Smith — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 10:30:00 +0000

The life free from condemnation
Romans 7.14-8.4

1. A paradox of life (v14-21)
However much we try to do the right things there is something at work in us which means we do the wrong thing (or is that just men?).

A Christian (v22)
Since Origen (who was a heretic anyway), it has been a popular view that Paul cannot be talking about himself when he writes “.. but I am unspiritual (v14)”. Or rather that he could not be referring to his current state as a mature Christian. How could he describe himself as “sold as a slave to sin”, when he has already written that he is a slave to righteousness (6.18). Douglas Moo sees Paul “looking back from his Christian understanding of [those] living under the law”.

So it is suggested Paul must be referring to his pre-Christian past, or he is giving an example of how a non-Christian feels, or a collective human – in Adam and not in Christ. Augustine initially agreed with Origen, and then changed his mind! He accepted that Paul was writing about his current experiences. There are three clues to this:

Paul says he is unspiritual and sinful. Christians do speak of themselves in this way, with realism. Unbelievers are often self-confident in their evaluation of themselves and their spiritual state.
Paul is very positive about the Law. It is spiritual, holy, righteous and good. In his inner being he delights in the Law. For Paul, the Law is to be loved and submitted to.
Paul cries out not in despair but in hope of deliverance. This is an example of the cry of all of God creation of redemption.

Charles Cranfield suggest that these verses show “the inner conflict characteristic of the true Christian”, when someones mind is being slowly renewed by the Holy Spirit.

Prisoner of the past (v23)
There is a contradiction here and that needs to be resolved.

Dr Martyn Lloyd-Jones believed that the great cry of wretchedness (v24) described a moment of revival as the Holy Spirit brought about a renewed sense of sinfulness. It doesn’t matter therefore if the “I” is Christian or not, since these moments are about conviction and not conversion.

James Dunn argues that the tension here is eschatological. It is the tension between Adam and Christ. It is the same tension experienced as the Kingdom of God breaks into the present. The believer is therefore both enslaved and liberated. There is much truth in this – the tension between the now and the yet to be. But there remains a contradiction between at the same time being ‘set free from sin’ and ‘sold as slaves to sin’.

Missing the power of God (Rms 7.6)
For my part, I think Stott is about right. Stott agrees that the “I” is a Christian for all the traditional reasons – his love and submission to the law. But this is a unhealthy Christian. For this Christian the normative conflict between the flesh and the Spirit has reached gargantuan proportions – warfare has broken out. But most importantly, this “I” seems to know nothing of the work of the Spirit. Stott says that this therefore is an Old Testament Christian! A lover of the law and of the church. An “in-between” person who is shaking off the legalistic religion to enjoy the freedom of the Spirit. Like Lazarus, such a person has appeared from the tomb, alive but still bound hand and foot.

2. A vital understanding of God’s love (v21-25)
Despite this paradox, God’s rescues us from the spiritual, ethical, emotional war which rages about us.

A Realistic View (v14, 21)

Love it and hate it there’s a battle going on (v17)

Two cries from the heart (v24, v25b)

3. An essential principle for Christian wholeness (8.1-4)
There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ. If Christ has set you free you are free indeed! Praise God!

A rescued Christian … (8.1)
Charles Hodge and Martyn Lloyd-Jones both affirm the whole of Romans 8 is for one purpose: To convince the Christian that he or she is secure!

No one’s going to condemn you (Rms 8.33ff)

Set free by the Spirit (2 Cor 3.8)
The law can neither save or sanctify. That is not the fault of the law, but us. It is our humanness which makes the law ineffective. What sin-weakened law cannot do, God does through the Cross. Now, once the work of Christ is complete, the Spirit is able to set us free from condemnation.

Footnote: The work of the Father

Sends his Son
As truly human but without sin
To become a sin offering
Jesus was made sin for us
So that we might be different and live by the Spirit (Ez 36.26ff)

Cell outlines
What’s interesting here is that, our standard, the standard that every person uses to measure themselves before believing, is dead wrong. All religions measure themselves by their own standard or a standard of a very good man (Buddha). What is the flaw in this thinking? Who is the judge in this line of thinking, us or God? Will God judge us according to our own standard?

Rewrite verse 15 in your own words? Do you sense this tension too?

Do Christians sin and why (15-20)? What does Paul want to do in verse 19? Does he do it? What does he not desire to do (19)? Does he do it?

Who can set us free? What part of us serves the law of God? What part of us serves the law of sin? How does it feel to you to be set free?

Define “condemnation” (1). Use a dictionary if necessary.
/>For what reason did the ‘Son’ accomplish these things (4)?

How can we look for the signs that we are trying to get around something we know is right in everyday life? Matt 7:14

Non-Christians and even some Christians are often surprised that God expects people to be perfect. Does it appear from Romans 8:4 that people are expected to fulfil the Law?

List at least two changes you desire to take place in your life because of these verses:

Going deeper:

Verses 14-20 seem to be one long run-on sentence. Try to summarize what Paul is describing here.

If we keep the Law, would we be saved? Gal 3, Heb 2, Rom 3, 1 Tim 1:8, Ps 119:39, Nehemiah 9:13, Ps 19:7, Ps 119:72. Do Jews get to heaven by keeping the Law?

As a Christian, what are your experiences with your old nature? Do you still think the flesh can do any good or at any time be relied upon?

How can we deal with our feelings and emotions when they go contrary to the will of God?

Gnosticism

John Smith — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 18:47:00 +0000

Gnosticism was probably the most erroneous teaching that arose in the early church (during the first three centuries). Gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis which means “to know”. It is a serious error which appears time and again in church history and is the basis of many cults.

Gnostics claim to possess a secret knowledge, a “higher truth” known only to a certain few. Gnostics claim this higher knowledge comes not from the Bible, but is acquired mystical. Gnostics see themselves as a privileged class better than everybody else because of their higher, deeper knowledge of God. It was also dualistic. Like Plato, Gnostics claimed that matter is inherently evil and illusory, whilst spirit is good and real.

Gnosticism taught that salvation is gained through the acquisition of this divine knowledge. Jesus said nothing about salvation through knowledge, but by faith in Him as Saviour.

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Furthermore, the salvation Christ offers is free and available to everyone (John 3:16), not just a select few who have acquired a special revelation.

Orthodox Christianity also states that there is one source of truth, the Bible. The Bible is the inspired, inerrant Word of the God, the only infallible rule of faith and practice (John 17:17; 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Hebrews 4:12). It is God’s written revelation to mankind and cannot set alongside other thoughts, ideas, writings, or visions.

The Gnostics, on the other hand, used a variety of early heretical writings known as the Gnostic gospels, a collection of forgeries claiming to be the “lost books of the Bible.” This too is a familiar theme of contemporary literature. Much New Age teaching is based on a mystical, intuitive, subjective, inward, emotional approach to truth.

The early church fathers, like Irenaeus, recognised the Gnostic writing as fraudulent forgeries that taught false doctrines about Jesus Christ, salvation, God, and pretty well devery other Christian truth. Even when the Gnostics quote from the Bible, they rewrote verses to harmonise with their philosophy.

The Gnostics believed that Jesus’ physical body was not real, but only appeared to be physical. They suggested that the Holy Spirit descended upon Jesus at His baptism and only at that point did he became the Son of God.

In reality, Jesus was truly God and also truly human. Only such a man could suffer and die upon the cross and so could become the acceptable substitutionary sacrifice for sin (Hebrews 2:14–17).

The solution is to “Test everything. Hold on to the good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21) and this we do by comparing everything we hear or read to the Word of God, the only Truth.

Living in the Power of God (2)

John Smith — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 10:30:00 +0000

The grace which lets us stand
Romans 5.1-11

Living in the Power of God: Peace (v1)

Shalom is a Hebrew word meaning peace, completeness, and welfare and can be used idiomatically to mean both hello and goodbye. As it does in English, it can refer to either peace between two entities (especially between man and God or between two countries), or to the well-being, welfare or safety of an individual or a group of individuals.

Maybe the text could be “let us have peace….” rather than “we have peace”, as most early manuscripts support this as the correct expression. It is then an exhortation – enjoy the peace of God. However, most translations and commentators stick with “we have peace”. It makes sense that Paul is writing about what we have: peace, grace, hope and so on. To include an exhortation in the midst of this doesn’t make theological or grammatical sense!

Living in the Power of God:Grace to stand (v2a)

This ‘grace’ is not because of the peace we experience – otherwise this would simply be a repeat of verse 1. Rather, our state of being favoured by God is because of our justification. Being justified or reconciled to God means we can stand before him, as if in the presence of royalty. Although to stand could mean simply to be (grace to be in God’s presence), it in more likely that it means to stand firm or abide in God’s presence. What an amazing situation we find ourselves in!

Living in the Power of God: Rejoice in hope (v2b)

Christian hope is not uncertain. It is and is being revealed in creation Ps 19.1, Is 6.3. It is revealed in the death and resurrection of Jesus (v6-11). It will be seen when Christ is fully revealled, when we are transformed into his glory (8.23). It will be seen in the new creation.

I have chosen to use the word ‘rejoice’ here, as in the NIV. The TNIV uses ‘boast’ and ‘glory’ even through the word is the same in verses 3 and 4. Elsewhere it is translated ‘exult’. Boasting is a ugly word but this is good boasting, a exultant celebration of the hope we have.

Calvin says of this verse that “Although believers are now pilgrims no earth, yet by their confidence they surmount the heavens, so that they cherish their future inheritance … with tranquility”.

Living in the Power of God:Rejoice in suffering

1.Suffering is the only way to glory
(Rms 8.17; Acts 14.22; Mark 13.19-24; Rev 7.14)

2.Suffering produces maturity now(v3-4)

Irenaeus, (2nd century AD – c. 202) was Bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, (now Lyons, France). He was an early church father and apologist, and his writings were formative in the early development of Christian theology. He especially taught against the heresy of gnosticism and for the careful discipleship of new Christians. He is credited with being the first church leader to recognise the New Testament alongside the Old as authoritative scripture.

Irenaeus believed that there were two stages to creation. First, people are born as an immature being that has to grow and develop. There would come a period of change where man would respond to situations in life and eventually become a ‘Child of God’.

Irenaeus argued that we were created imperfect so that we could freely choose to become good and turn to God. We were made at a distance from God – a distance of knowledge.

Irenaeus saw the world as a ‘soul-making place’. Evil is necessary to aid this development. Natural evil such as famine had a divine purpose – to develop qualities such as compassion. Evil as a necessary part of life, something that will eventually make us into better people.

Is God responsible for the existence of evil? For Irenaeus God is partly responsible for evil. Evil is a means by which we can grow and learn.

What is the origin of evil and the role of freewill? Irenaeus said that the world was made imperfect and so moral evil is the result of the freewill to follow or disobey God.

Some other aspects of this view of suffering are also attractive. The normal assumption of the skeptic is that God has supposedly created a perfect world and that if there is suffering in it it must mean that…

God is a nasty or weak character.

God does not exist.

For Irenaeus, this problem is overcome by the idea that the world is (or more specifically we are) not finished, we are ‘moving toward’ perfect but we are not there yet. God wants us to develop freely to become ‘his children’, he therefore gives us the perfect environment to develop both spiritually and morally, without pain suffering and other nastiness this could not happen. A perfect world can not make us perfect people – Adam being the prime example.

I don’t agree with everything Irenaeus taught, but this verse does suggest that evil has a function which enables us to grow and eventually overcome. Remarkably God turns even the most awful situations in shoots of goodness.

3.Suffering is the context for knowing God’s love (v5)

Then, seen in the death of Jesus (v6-9)
Now, experienced in the power of the Holy Spirit (v5a)
One of the ministries of the Spirit is to pour God’s love into our hearts. “Indeed the initial outpouring remains as a flood”. Strictly speaking is not an outpouring of the Spirit, but of the love of God by the Spirit.
Expected, confidently in the future (v9-11)

Cell outline

Don’t people have peace with God anyway? How or why are we at war with him?

After 4 chapters of dealing with the reasons for our alienation from God, we read “Therefore having been justified through faith, we have peace with God”. What kind of peace can we expect to come from our Christian faith? Do these verses help develop your understanding: Matt 10:34, Mark 5:34, Acts 9:31, Acts 10:36, Luke 7:50, Luke 8:48, Luke 24:36, John 3:36, Col 1:21-22.

Try and put into your own words what it mean to have “access by faith into this grace”? These verses could help: Jeremiah 32:38-40

What kind of suffering is Paul discussing in verse 3 and how can we endure them? These verses may help: John 15:20 1 Thess 3:3, 1 Peter 4:19, 16, Acts 14:22, Eph 3:13,

Think of some examples when you have experienced the progression of character building in v3-4. What did you learn about God and yourself?

Going deeper
Draw a line graph for the time you have been a Christian and your sense of the presence of God (v1)? Why is it this way? What can you learn for the future?

What is the explanation of verses 6-8? What was or is “the right time”? Christ’s death 2000 years ago was “once for all”. So who are the sinners in v8? What can it mean that you and I were still sinners, when we hadn’t been born.

Living in the Power of God (1)

John Smith — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 10:30:00 +0000

The gift that makes us strong
Romans 1.7-17

Encouragements which enable us to grow (v11)

Spiritual gifts are the sovereign work of God (1 Cor 12, Rms 12, Eph 4)

Our blessing comes from others in whatever way is appropriate (v11, Eph 4.29, Jude 1.20-23)

… and that’s mutual (v12)

We are not all perfect!

Verse 14 has a tricky expression – “I am a debtor to both the Greeks and non-Greeks, both to the wise and foolish“. How can Paul be debt to these people? This leads some translators to use the word ‘obligation’.

There are two ways to be in debt. Either, by borrowing money from someone. Or, and this is how Paul uses the term, by receiving money from a third party to pass on someone else.

For example, if I borrow £100 from my friend, I am in debt to him. I have got myself into debt. But if my friend gives me £100 to give to you, I am in debt to you until I pass it on. It is my friend who has placed me in your debt by entrusting his money to me to give to you.

Paul not therefore in debt to the Roman church because he has ‘borrowed’ from them. But God has entrusted the gospel to Paul to be shared with the Roman church. Until he does so he is in their debt.

We too are debtors to the world because we too have been entrusted to with the same good news. We have no right to keep it to ourselves.

Power which brings us salvation (v16)

There is nothing to be ashamed of in the gospel (v16, 1 Cor 2.3)

There is nothing which our God cannot transform (v16b)

This is nothing other than resurrection power (v4, 1 Cor 2.4-5)

Life which is experienced through faith (v17)

Verse 17 gives us various ways of understanding the expression “the righteousness of God”. Or should it be “righteousness from God”. There are an unmanageably many amount of views on this.

Some suggest that it refers to God’s character or divine nature. Since God will judge the world his actions must be ‘right’. God loves righteousness and hates wickedness Ps 45.6. The righteousness of God is seen ultimately in the cross. When God presented Christ as a sacrifice it was to be both just and the justifier.

Others say it refers to God’s activity in salvation. Salvation and righteousness are ofter parallels in Hebrew poetry. Salvation is the form that God’s righteousness takes as he vindicates his people. In his salvation, God overthrows the forces of evil and shows his loyalty to his covenant.

Yet others, says that it is God’s achievement in us. It is a righteousness from God which allows us to stand in his presence. On balance, whilst the other options do not have to be excluded, this is most likely what Paul has in mind. Throughout Romans, Paul is contrasting the righteousness which we can achieve in ourselves but fails to reach God’s standard, with that which is from God, given as a free gift to those which believe and bought at the cost of Christ’s death.

The Christian life can only be a life of faith (Phil 1.20-21)

The Christian life can only be a righteous life (Hab 2:4, Gal 3.11, Heb 10.38)

The Christian life can only be empowered by the Holy Spirit (v16, Col 1.26)

Cell outlines:

Read Romans 1: 8-17
Romans is different from other epistles in that it doesn’t address any “particular” problem. Rather it is a letter of encouragement for us all. Is there anything that struck you from reading the passage or the sermon?

Why in v15 does Paul say he’s anxious to preach the Gospel to “you in Rome” when they are already believers? What is the value of preaching gospel to Christians? How do you feel when you hear the ‘old old story’?

How did Paul prove that he was not ashamed of the Gospel? How are we ashamed of the Gospel?

What does it mean when Paul calls the Gospel the “power of God”? What are the powers of God? When Jesus says he came to save us, what does he save us from? How have you experienced God saving you from:

Sickness – Matt 9:21; Danger – Matt 8:25; Culture – Acts 2:40; Lostness – Luke 19:10,; Sin – Matt 1:21; Wrath of God – Romans 5:9; Ignorance – 2 Thess 1:8; Self – Luke 14:26; Darkness – Col 1:13.

Going deeper:
Foxe’s Book of Martyrs speaks of the shame that comes from spreading the Gospel, The gospel “brings” us to salvation and also it brings suffering (2 Cor 11:23-30). How do you experience and then reconcile these two at work in you?

Is believing (v16) an ongoing experience or is it a one-time event? What happens to those who seem to fall away (1 Cor 15.2)?

What might “righteousness that is by faith from first to last” mean? Does the alternative reading “righteousness that is by faith to faith” help your understanding.