When Politics Turn Hostile Toward Christianity / The Gospel of Peter

Good morning from Lancashire! I flew in yesterday from Sri Lanka and the Far East. It’s good to be home—and back in the cool autumn weather.

First off, thank you for your eagerness to cover so many subscriptions (Qatar: 20; Saudi Arabia: 20; Cameroon: 4; and Sri Lanka: 7). Here’s a typical response from the people you’re sponsoring: “Words cannot adequately convey our appreciation for this great generosity—for your sincere concern for our spiritual growth. The website subscription will be of tremendous assistance!” We’re confident funding for the remaining 27 subscriptions will continue to come in—as has been our experience through the years.

QUOTABLE

• The word of God is like a pearl that has a beautiful appearance on whatever side you turn it. — Aphrahat, Demonstrations 22.26

• The humble person drinks up instruction like water; it enters his veins like oil. — Aphrahat, Demonstrations 9.2

• Remember, O student, what David said: “I have learned from all my teachers.” — Aphrahat, Demonstrations 22.26

These lovely words are from the Persian / Syrian Aphrahat (4th century AD), and emphasize the humility the Lord expects of his followers, particularly in their willingness to learn from others.

Q&A

1671—Proverbs 21:18: How are the Wicked a Ransom for the Righteous?
Would you please be so kind and help me out with Proverbs 21:18, when you have a minute? Why / how are the wicked a ransom for the righteous, and the treacherous for the upright? My Bible (the CSB) points me to Prov 11:8 and Isa 43:3, but I still don't understand ransom in that context. Isn't ransom what gets you out of an undesirable situation (kidnapping, blackmailing, extortion, cybercrime ...)? Did the original term mean something different? — H.W.  

I’ve asked my American colleague Joey Harris to weigh in:

The “ransom” is כפר, an “atonement” (same root as in Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement) for reparation or “covering” (another connotation of כפר) for the consequences or results of sin. KEEP READING 

.
1672—Does grace have obligations?
In Rom 8:1 we read, “There is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,” and yet in 8:12-13, “Therefore, brothers and sisters, we have an obligation—but it is not to the flesh, to live according to it…” I hear Paul saying, "There is no condemnation in Christ Jesus—therefore, we have an obligation.” In ancient times, was grace understood to entail certain obligations? I read a book by John Barclay titled Paul and the Gift. Barclay highlights the obligatory essence of grace. I’d love to hear your thoughts. — P. K.

Yes indeed. Grace has obligations! And certainly, in ancient times there was an expected reciprocity between giver and recipient. I’d like to recommend one of Matthew Bates’ works, Salvation by Allegiance Alone: Rethinking Faith, Works, and the Gospel of Jesus the King (2017). It's very well done. I've met the author a couple of times and heard him speak. He’s a clear thinker and makes his case well. I’d love to know your reaction.

Upcoming:

• Did fed-up Corinthians leave their church?

• Will a person go to hell for not giving Sunday contribution?

• Can Christians take oaths?

Fragments of Papias (c.100)

Papias was a prolific writer, although sadly only fragments of his work has been preserved. He lived in Hierapolis (near Colossae and Laodicea), the area where Epaphras and Paul ministered. I’ve selected four fragments for comment.

First off, Papias speaks of the traitor Judas’s enormously bloated body—crushed by a chariot, so that his guts gushed out (frag. iii).

Second: “As the presbyters say, then those who are deemed worthy of an abode in heaven shall go there, others shall enjoy the delights of Paradise, and others shall possess the splendor of the city; for everywhere the Savior will be seen, according as they shall be worthy who see Him. But that there is a distinction between the habitation of those who produce a hundredfold, and that of those who produce sixty-fold, and that of those who produce thirty-fold; for the first will be take up into the heavens, the second class will dwell in Paradise, and the last will inhabit the city… The presbyters, the disciples of the apostles, say that this is the gradation and arrangement of those who are saved…” (frag. v).

• Like some other ancient writers, Papias designates several ultimate possible destinies for the the righteous: heaven, Paradise, and the city (probably referring to Rev 21).

• The difference? According to him, it’s a matter of productivity. The more we have put in, the more we will appreciate our reward—that is, the greater our reward.

• Papias claims this was the teaching of the second generation of Christian leaders, yet the ancient writers held varying opinions on the topic.

Third, Papias seems to have proclaimed a literal millennial rule following the general resurrection (frag. vi). That is, once Christ returns and the dead are raised, he would reign over an earthly, political kingdom for 1000 years.

• Several Christian groups throughout history have taken Rev 20 literally—a mistake, in my opinion. For example, in the many years right before after 1000 AD, numerous odd behaviors and superstitions marked European Christendom.

• The way in which this belief is relayed, by the 4th-century church historian Eusebius, makes clear it was not universally accepted.

And last: “…Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a regular narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictitious into the statements” (frag. vi).

• Peter, the chief of the original Twelve, relayed the gospel to Mark, who either translated him (Aramaic to Greek) or interpreted him (that is, selected, ordered, and adapted the material).

• The ancients were concerned with order, but not necessarily strict chronology—a fact that makes sense of many of the discrepancies found in the gospel accounts.

• Mark’s work, which we call the Gospel of Mark, was essentially the Gospel of Peter—though not to be confused with the much later spurious Gospel of Peter. Each of the four gospels may be connected with an apostle: Matthew with himself, Mark with Peter, Luke with Paul, John with himself.

Next week: the fascinating character of Justin Martyr (c.155 AD), the Samaritan philosopher who became a powerful advocate and apologist for the faith.