Click here for Part 2 of this article.

I. Introduction

Like Psalm 23 or Prov 3:5-6, the simple promise of Phil 1:6 is claimed by many Christians for comfort and encouragement, “For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.”² They understand the verse in a general way to imply that God is presently sustaining us in His grace, and that this divine ministry continues a process which began at salvation.³ Others find in the verse a more specific theological teaching: Progressive sanctification cannot fail because God has sovereignly ordained that His “good work” of salvation will continue in both sanctification and final glorification.

But Christians often find consolation in biblical truths that are not really found in the passages that they claim. And sometimes theologians base their theological systems on inappropriate conclusions from the prooftexts they employ. Any so-called promise of Scripture or theological teaching must stand or fall in light of valid exegetical investigation. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate in the immediate and the broader context of the whole letter that Phil 1:6 does not intend to teach the concept that God guarantees the sanctification of His children. Therefore, it cannot justifiably be used to affirm that God’s sovereign grace prevents the possibility of prolonged, serious failure in the Christian life.

II. Overview of Positions on Philippians 1:6

Surprisingly, only two basic options can be culled from commentaries and interpretive research on Philippians.

A. The “Good Work” is God’s Gift of Salvation/Sanctification

A wide variety of scholars perceives Phil 1:6 as addressing the work of salvation and sanctification in the life of the believer.⁴ This might be labeled the “traditional view” because of its wide popularity in laymen’s commentaries.⁵ But certain theologians claim v 6 as a key text for the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints--the teaching that true Christians will persevere in faith and holiness.⁶ Thielman summarizes this theology with a succinct interpretation of the verse: “Those who will be saved in the future live holy lives in the present.”⁷ In his book, Faith Works, MacArthur references Phil 1:6 six different times--as much as or more than any other verse, showing the centrality of its concepts for his theology. It is generally assumed that the theological meaning he assigns to the verse is the only viable interpretation. No exegesis of the passage, discussion of the context, or refutation of any alternative interpretations is offered.⁸ He explains his theology in this way:

That ongoing work of grace in the Christian’s life is as much a certainty as justification, glorification, or any other aspect of God’s redeeming work . . . [Phil 1:6 is quoted] . . . Salvation is wholly God’s work, and He finishes what He starts. His grace is sufficient. And potent. It cannot be defective in any regard.⁹

The importance of the verse under discussion for Reformed theology is noted by Hendrikus Berkhof. He observes that in the discussion of the perseverance of the saints, its defenders always point to seven key passages, one of which is Phil 1:6.¹⁰ Baker does just this, citing Phil 1:6 as one of six major passages that teach the doctrine.¹¹ Historically, such confessions as the French Confession of Faith of 1559 (Article XXI) claim the verse for perseverance:

We believe also that faith is given to the elect not only to introduce them into the right way, but also to make them continue in it to the end. For as it is God who hath begun the work, He will also perfect it.¹²

B. The “Good Work” is the Philippians’ Gift/Participation in Advancing the Gospel

The average Christian is sometimes surprised to learn that there is a viable alternative to interpreting Phil 1:6 as a reference to salvation. In fact, there are many commentators who view the good work that God began in the Philippians as their partnership with Paul in advancing the Gospel. Some among those who hold this interpretation view the generous monetary fellowship given to Paul as more prominent and explicit in Phil 1:6,¹³ while others find in the verse a lucid but indirect reference to the gift. The Knox translation best captures the nuance of 1:6, where the gift is more primary: “Nor am I less confident, that he who has inspired this generosity in you will bring it to perfection, ready for the day when Jesus Christ comes.”¹⁴

Eadie may be representative of those who understand 1:6 as slightly broader than, yet inclusive, of the financial gift. He states that the koinonia (fellowship) of 1:5 includes “all that belongs to the defense and propagation of the gospel.”¹⁵ Swift is also quite clear in expressing this view of 1:6:

His [Paul’s] confident hope was that God would perfect (epitelesei) them in their work of the gospel and that it would bear fruit from then till the day of Christ. In brief, verse 6 speaks of the perfecting of the Philippians’ koinonia (“partnership”) and of them as koinonoi(“partners”) in the gospel.¹⁶

Most scholars claiming this interpretation--whether suggesting that the gift is primary or secondary--include with the Philippians’ generosity other factors that contributed to their partnership with Paul. These include such matters as their sympathy for and cooperation with the apostle, and their united struggle for the Gospel. On the other hand, Hodges views the “good work” of 1:6 as a specific reference to the Philippians’ most recent gift (discussed in chapter 4), not as a general reference to their past generosity or present cooperation in the Gospel.¹⁷ Despite these variations and distinctions, the financial gift/participation in the advance of the Gospel will be considered as a single interpretive viewpoint.

It is the thesis of this article that when all the evidence is in, interpreting the “good work” of v 6 as a reference to salvation/sanctification becomes a highly artificial interpretation imposed on the text. The analysis that follows will seek to demonstrate this.

III. Analysis and Solutions

A. Thematic and Structural Considerations

The meaning derived from 1:6 must be in harmony with 1) the nature of an epistolary introduction, and 2) the structure of the letter as a whole. The rationale for this will become evident as we proceed.

1. Philippians 1:6 and an Epistolary Introduction

Philippians is often thought to have no central thematic organization.¹⁸ Swift, however, has argued for a clear structure and theme for the epistle.¹⁹ After a salutation (1:1-2), the introduction to the book composes 1:3-11.²⁰ The body of the epistle encompasses 1:27-4:9. Philippians 1:12-26 comprises a “biographical prologue” in which significant motifs of the introduction are developed and through which a transition is made to the body of the letter. The epilogue (4:10-20) corresponds to and balances the prologue proper (1:3-11).²¹

Repeated research on epistolary introductions has now agreed that such introductions function as a formal device that announces the central themes of a letter.²² Drawing especially upon the core of the introduction, vv 5-7, Swift concludes that the entire theme of the book is the Philippians’ partnership in advancing the Gospel. He reasons that this theme ties the book together as a coherent whole.²³ Commenting on the role of 1:6, he observes:

Theergon agathon(“good work”) in verse 6 must be interpreted by the koinonia of the previous verse. This exegetical point is frequently noted by commentators, though few of them consistently restrict it enough to this sense.²⁴ This writer holds that verse 6 refers restrictively [italics original] to the perfecting of the Philippians as workers for the gospel, and to the perfecting of their works in the cause of the gospel. Many exegetes, failing to note this, have thus failed to see that verses 3-6 contain a thematic summary of the entire epistle [italics added]. . . . Verses 3-6 then, are a cameo of the entire epistle. They introduce the main theme, the Philippians’ partnership²⁵ in the gospel.²⁴

Even if one is not convinced with Swift that 1:6 describes the central theme of the book, this much is clear: The prologue of Philippians, like that of any true NT epistle, contains in seed form all the significant concepts that are developed in the letter. But this understanding of the epistolary introduction militates against impressions that 1:6 refers to the salvation/sanctification process, since the theme and unity of the book cannot be adequately explained using this conception.

2. The Harmony of the Prologue and Epilogue

Not only does the introduction to Philippians announce the topics of the letter, it uniquely corresponds to the epilogue, as noted above. Jewett, citing Schubert, observes that 4:10-20, with its central discussion concerning the Philippians’ gift to Paul, is even more closely related to the epistolary “table of contents” (1:3-11) than any other portion of the letter.²⁵ Both verbal and conceptual links between the two units are striking and force on us the need to interpret the introduction in light of the gift motif in the conclusion.²⁶

Dalton has observed four of these parallels and how they evidence an inclusio which binds the whole letter together.²⁷ Two common elements relate to the use of koinonia(1:5 with 4:15) and cognates (1:7 with 4:14) that occur in both paragraphs. A third element relates to the inception of this partnership: “from the first day until now” (1:5) and “at the first preaching of the gospel” (4:15).²⁸ Finally, a reciprocal attitude of compassion is expressed in identical phrases found in 1:7 and 4:10.

Besides Dalton’s four common elements, at least four others can be identified. First, the parallel between 1:3 (“I thank my God [eucaristo to Theo]”) and 4:10 (“I rejoiced greatly in the Lord [echarenen Kyriomegalos]”) can be established on the fact that eucharisteo and chairo are etymologically related.²⁹ Philippians 4:10 is also parallel with the reference to chara(“joy”) in 1:4. Second, the Greek phrase kalosepoiesate (“you have done well”) in 4:14 is used elsewhere of doing good works.³⁰ Therefore, it forms a striking correspondence with the “good work” of 1:6. Third, the mention of the day of Christ³¹ in 1:6 is recalled in the Bema (Judgment Seat of Christ) terminology of 4:17 (“to your account,” eis logon hymon). Taken together, both passages appear to focus on the eschatological significance of the Philippians’ benevolent gift.³² Fourth, while 4:8 (“whatever is right . . . let your mind dwell on,” dikaia . . . logizesthe) concludes the body of the epistle, it may subtly stimulate the reader to reflect back to the introduction, preparing the way for 4:10-20. It was in the introduction that Paul demonstrated “thinking what was right” (1:7 “it is only right to feel,” dikaion . . . phronein).³³

Both individually and collectively, these parallels cannot easily be dismissed. Since the prologue and the epilogue correspond with each other, the subject of the Philippians’ financial support of the Gospel must be treated as peripheral to the book’s theme. Next to Second Corinthians 8-9, the discussion of the financial contribution of the Philippians in 4:10-20 is, after all, the second most extensive passage on NT giving in all the epistles. Its frequent mention in Philippians also testifies to its centrality for the book (2:17;³⁴ 25-30; 4:10-20). The chart below catalogs the similarities that relate 4:10-20 to 1:3-7.³⁵

Parallels Between Philippians 1 and Philippians 4

B. Exegetical Considerations

1. The Koinonia of 1:5

It is generally accepted in modern editions of the Greek NT that Phil 1:3-7 constitutes one long sentence. This helps form a contextual unit. In v 3, Paul expresses his thanks to God for the Philippians each time he brought them before God in prayer.⁴² The expressed reason⁴³ for this thanks comes in 1:5, with v 4 expressing a grammatically parenthetical thought.⁴⁴ Paul’s thanksgiving was specifically for the church’s participation (koionia) in the advance of the Gospel. It is widely admitted that koinonia in 1:5 alludes to the gifts Paul received from the Philippian church. Nevertheless, many commentators quickly pass over this fact and interpret the word as a mystical union with Christ (salvation)⁴⁵ --a concept derived more readily from the English translation “fellowship” than from the Greek. This word group (koinonia, “partnership”; koinoneo, “to share”; synkoinoneo, “to share together with”; synkoinonos, “fellow-partner”) does not primarily imply association with another person (e.g., with Christ). The basic concept implies a participation with another in a common cause or goal, i.e., a “sharing” or “having something in common with another.”⁴⁶ The English words “partner” or “partnership” frequently satisfy the connotations behind these Greek words.⁴⁷ While the word group can have a general connotation, it frequently carries a specific idea of sharing financially or forming a partnership through financial giving.⁴⁸ In this manner, it is sometimes translated “contribution” or a related term.⁴⁹

That Paul is thinking directly of the Philippians’ contribution financially when he uses koinonia in 1:5 is supported by the following reasons. First, Paul brings together in chapter four the verb koinoneo (4:15) and the compound verb synkoinoneo⁵⁰(4:14) to identify the gift they had sent him in his imprisonment. The compound noun synkoinonoi (“fellow-sharers”) is used in 1:7⁵¹ and expresses a unity that the Philippians have with Paul in his imprisonment, and in defending and vindicating the Gospel. The koinonia of 1:5 must essentially be the same as the synkoinonoi in 1:7.⁵² This implies an inextricable connection with the gift motif in 4:10-20. At the same time, it ties together the concepts in 1:5-7, and demands an interpretation that treats all three verses as a flow of thought. In other words, 1:6 cannot go uninfluenced by the conceptions of the Philippian gift portrayed in 1:5 and again in 1:7, and finally in 4:10-20. It may also be added that from this vantage point, four of the six uses of koinonia and its cognates in Philippians focus on the gift motif.⁵³ We may go so far as to say that rarely (if ever) does koinonia or its cognates refer to salvation.⁵⁴ To take the koinonia here as equivalent to salvation would be a rare use of the term indeed.

Second, koinonia followed by eis⁵⁵cannot be taken to imply “sharing in the gospel [by faith].”⁵⁶ Hawthorne astutely agrees:

Hence, it is easy to see in this expression koinoniahymoneisto,euangelion a clear reference to the gift(s) that the Philippians had sent to Paul . . . in order to make it possible for him to spread the gospel. The same preposition, eis, follows koinoniahere as in Rom 15:26 and 2 Cor 9:23. The Philippians were partners (koinonoi) with the apostle in the proclamation of the good news, not in the sense that they shared the same faith with him or were co-evangelists with him, but that they supported him financially in his mission work [italics added].⁵⁷

Third, suffering,⁵⁸ evangelism, and salvation⁵⁹ may be auxiliaries to the Philippians’ koinonia, but cannot be the central element(s) in it.⁶⁰ This is evident, since (1) the self-ambitious brothers mentioned in 1:14-17 were true believers (1:14-15), were active in a bold evangelism that proclaimed the true Gospel (1:18), and may have suffered for the Gospel in their efforts.⁶¹ But they certainly did not have any koinonia with Paul, as is clear from 1:16 (Majority Text) or 1:17 (Critical Text). The whole purpose of Paul in writing the letter--to encourage a unified partnership for the sake of the Gospel--stands against any interpretation that includes these brothers in the koinonia with Paul and the Gospel. Also, (2) where the Philippians are said to have koinnia, the emphasis falls more on their sharing in Paul’s trials than on their own (1:7; 4:14).⁶² Unity (1:27; 2:2-4; 4:2), joy (1:25; 2:18; 4:4), and godly living (1:27; 2:16) are undoubtedly foundations to the koinonia. However, the Philippians’ exemplary affection for Paul (1:17; 4:10)⁶³ and (probably) their prayers (1:19)⁶⁴ are more directly associated with koinonia.⁶⁵ Therefore, it is the sacrificial gift to Paul that forms the essence of their partnership and the “good work” instigated by God.

Fourth, the Philippian partnership in the Gospel is defined in context by the limiting phrase, “from the first day until now.” The thought of the “first day” is picked up conceptually in 1:6 and stated as what God had begun among them (in them or by them). The “now” can be identified as the time at which the letter was written. More precisely it is the very time Paul received the recent gift from the Philippians.⁶⁶ But what or when is the “first day”? If the koinoniarefers to salvation, then the “first day” marks the point at which many in the church believed the Gospel. But in saying “until now,” Paul designates a pivotal and significant moment. In what sense, then, have they shared in salvation “until now”?⁶⁷ This becomes a theological and interpretive impasse. By mentioning that this koinonia has gone unbroken “until now,” Paul hints at a future contingency. If salvation were under discussion, he should have thanked God for their eternal fellowship with Christ and the Gospel.

Further, if the koinonia refers to the point of new birth, then the first day would likely be individualistic, differing for each believer at Philippi.⁶⁸ But the sense of the text is corporate--a “first day” for the congregation as a whole. The corporate nuance of the passage is strengthened by the unusual threefold repetition of “all of you” in the prologue (pantonhymon in vv 4, 7; pantas hymas in v 8).

On the other hand, if the koinonia refers to the Philippian participation financially with Paul in spreading the Gospel, then a clear harmony exists between 1:5-7 and 4:10-20. In 4:15,⁶⁹ Paul marks the beginning of the Philippians’ contributions to him as the first point at which he preached the Gospel⁷⁰ after leaving Macedonia (4:15; NASB, “at the first preaching of the gospel, after I departed from Macedonia”).⁷¹ The Philippians initiated a partnership with Paul from the very first time he proclaimed the Good News beyond their Macedonian borders. Not only that, but even while in Thessalonica,⁷² Paul’s first stop after Philippi (Acts 17:1; 1 Thess 2:2), he received financial aid from the Philippians on several occasions.⁷³ Their financial help formed a one-of-a-kind cooperation, so that he could say that no other church participated with him in this manner when he entered Achaia.⁷⁴

IV. Conclusion

Unlike many problem passages, the interpretive alternatives to Phil 1:6 are few. Commentators line up in two broad camps. Most common is the interpretive approach that understands the verse to address the ongoing sanctification and final eschatological salvation of the Philippians (and all Christians) which God began in them. Despite the widespread popularity of this viewpoint, many commentators and scholars find that this interpretation violates the mise-en-scne of the passage. This article has been in agreement with this criticism. Instead, the verse speaks of the Philippians’ joint venture with Paul by means of one or all of their financial contributions to his Gospel mission.

In the verses leading up to 1:6, no hints can be found to encourage us to handle the verse as an overview of the salvation/sanctification process. A true epistolary introduction prepares the reader (and listener)⁷⁵ for all the major themes to be addressed in the rest of the letter. Salvation/sanctification as a primary thematic development in Philippians as a whole seems absent, while a gift motif stands out as a dominant subject of 4:10-20. Partnership in the Gospel is also a significant concern for Paul, and the disunity in the Macedonian congregation threatened this partnership (1:27; 4:2). The striking harmony of 1:3-7 and 4:10-20 favors an approach to 1:6 that will highlight the Philippians’ gift to Paul.

The koinoniaof v 5 cannot exegetically be interpreted as the communion of the Philippian believers with Christ at new birth. Instead, (1) the use of the term and its cognates within Philippians (especially 1:7; 4:14, 15), (2) the combination of koinonia with the following preposition eis, and (3) the limiting phrase “from the first day until now” all apply satisfactorily to the united participation Paul and the Philippians had in spreading the Gospel. Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, preaching and defending the Gospel. The Philippians joined him by their sacrificial monetary gifts, even most recently while he was in prison.

The second installment of this article will focus on vv 6-7, examining the meaning of “good work,” the concepts of “began” and “complete,” and the relevance of the parallel of 1:3-7 with Second Corinthians 8-9.

Endnotes

1This and a second article are a slightly modified version of a paper presented at the November 1995 annual meeting of the Evangelical Theological Society. Some changes reflect the valuable critiques of others who have read that paper.

2 Unless noted differently, English translations are from the NASB.

3I do not object to finding in Phil 1:6 the general principle that God is faithful to his children. Maxie D. Dunnam, “Philippians,” The Communicator’s Commentary, ed. Lloyd J. Ogilvie (Dallas: Word Publishers, 1982), 8:260, appears to approach the verse this way: “The Christian has no right to expect to fare any better in his own self-effort than the non-Christian. What the Christian can count on is a God who keeps faith. The truth of Philippians 1:6 is that . . . ‘God is faithful’ . . .” See also Theodore H. Epp, Christ Preeminent: Studies in Philippians (Lincoln, NE: Back to the Bible, 1980), 31-32.

4 Merrill C. Tenney, Philippians: The Gospel at Work (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1956), 41, but on p. 42, he admits that in 1:7 there is an allusion to the gift; John Calvin, The Epistle to the Philippians, reprint ed. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965), 228-30; Karl Barth, The Epistle to the Philippians, translated by James W. Leitch (Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1962), 17, who denies that 1:6 has even a glimmer of reference to the Philippians’ financial help, but on p. 16 views the koinonia of 1:5 as the Philippians’ active advance of the Gospel; Kenneth Grayston, The Epistles to the Galatians and to the Philippians (London: Epworth Press, 1957), 81; Homer A. Kent, Jr., “Philippians,” Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1978), 11:105; J. Hugh Michael, The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians, Moffatt New Testament Commentary (London: Hodder and Stoughton, Ltd., 1928), 13; H. A. W. Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Epistles to the Philippians and Colossians, and to Philemon, 4th ed., translated by John C. Moore, rev. and ed. by Wm. P. Dickson, preface and supplementary notes by Timothy Dwight (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1889), 13-14; R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, Ephesians, and Philippians (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1937), 709-710; Moiss Silva, Philippians, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Kenneth Barker (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), 52; Judith M. Gundry Volf, Paul and Perseverance: Staying In and Falling Away (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1990), 33-47; Gordon D. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, New International Commentary on the New Testament, ed. Ned B. Stonehouse, F. F. Bruce, and Gordon D. Fee (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995), 85-88.

⁵ Bruce B. Barton et al., Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon, Life Application Bible Commentary (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1995), 27-28.; Robert G. Gromacki, Stand United in Joy: An Exposition of Philippians (Schaumburg, IL: Regular Baptist Press, 1980), 39-41; John F. Walvoord, Philippians. Triumph in Christ, Everyman’s Bible Commentary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971), 28; David L. Hocking, How to Be Happy in Difficult Situations: Studies in Philippians (Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books, 1975), 26-27; Warren W. Wiersbe, Be Joyful (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1975), 29-30, applies v 6 to salvation but recognizes it may refer to the Philippians’ gift.

6 Many commentators and theologians mistakenly assume that “eternal security” and the “perseverance of the saints” are but two names for the same doctrine; Robert H. Stein, Difficult Passages in the New Testament: Interpreting Puzzling Texts in the Gospels and Epistles (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990), 352; Alvin L. Baker, “Eternal Security Rightly Understood,” Fundamentalist Journal (September 1984): 19-20; W. Boyd Hunt, “The Perseverance of the Saints,” Basic Christian Doctrines, ed. Carl F. H. Henry (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1962), 238; Edwin H. Palmer, The Five Points of Calvinism (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972), 69. Some note that they are not the same. Arguing for perseverance and against eternal security: L. Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 4th rev. and enlarged ed. (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1939), 546; throughout the book, John F. MacArthur, The Gospel According to Jesus. What Does Jesus Mean When He Says “Follow Me”? rev. and expanded ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1994); ibid., Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993). Arguing against perseverance but for eternal security: R. T. Kendall, Once Saved, Always Saved (Chicago: Moody Press, 1983), 19-22; indirectly throughout the book, Charles Stanley, Eternal Security: Can You Be Sure? (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990); directly throughout the book, Zane C. Hodges, Absolutely Free! A Biblical Reply to Lordship Salvation (Dallas: Redencin Viva, 1989); ibid., The Gospel Under Siege: Faith and Works in Tension, rev. and enlarged ed. (Dallas: Redencin Viva, 1992); Joseph C. Dillow, The Reign of the Servant Kings: A Study of Eternal Security and the Final Significance of Man (Hayesville, NC: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992).

7 Frank Thielman, Philippians, NIV Application Commentary Series, ed. Terry Muck (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1995), 39. While evangelicals like Thielman might vehemently deny that they teach a works-salvation, it is intensely difficult to avoid drawing this conclusion from such statements.

8 MacArthur, Faith Works, 24, 33, 71, 110, 185, 192. An author should not always be faulted just because a particular verse is not discussed in depth. In this case, however, the verse is used so repeatedly and is so fundamental to his theology that one might ask for a more thorough treatment. Compare also where the verse has an assumed meaning, Stein, Difficult Passages, 256, 263, 288, 348.

9 MacArthur, Faith Works, 33. Elsewhere MacArthur (ibid., 192) writes, “They [professing believers] can be sure that if their faith is real it will endure to the end--because God himself guarantees it . . . (Phil. 1:6).” And again (ibid., 24), “Real faith cannot be defective or short lived but endures forever (Phil. 1:6; cf. Heb. 11).” Yet later, quoting Phil 1:6 again (ibid., 71), he qualifies the sanctification process: “Sometimes the process is slow and arduous; sometimes it is immediately triumphant.” It seems weightless theologically to argue for a particular view of sanctification from the fact that God’s grace is not defective. If God’s grace is not defective when the process of sanctification proceeds rather slowly or even stops for a limited period of time, why is it defective when the process seems extremely slow or stops for an extended period of time? One could even argue for sinless perfection in this life based on the theology that God’s grace cannot be “defective.” Quoting Phil 1:6 in The Gospel According to Jesus, 189, MacArthur comments, “The work of salvation cannot ultimately be thwarted.” This reasoning is not conclusive either. One who believes that glorification, but not progressive sanctification, is guaranteed for the Christian will concur that “God’s work of salvation cannot ultimately be thwarted.”

10 Hendrikus Berkhof, “The Christian Life: Perseverance and Renewal,” Major Themes in the Reformed Tradition, ed. Donald K. McKim (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1992), 156. For example, well-known Reformed theologian, Robert Dabney, Lectures in Systematic Theology (1878; reprint edition, Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1972), 707, begins his whole discussion on perseverance by citing Phil 1:6.

11 Baker, “Eternal Security,” 20.

12 “The French Confession of Faith,” in The Creeds of Christendom, ed. Philip Schaff (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985), 3:371. The Westminster Confession of Faith (1646) cites Phil 1:6 in the first paragraph of Chapter XVII, “The Perseverance of the Saints” (ibid., 636).

13 Kenneth S. Wuest, “Philippians,” Wuest’s Word Studies (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1966), 2:32, states that “the good work is giving to missions.”

14The Holy Bible: A Translation from the Latin Vulgate in Light of the Hebrew and Greek Originals (New York: Sheed and Ward, Inc., 1950).

15John A. Eadie, A Commentary on the Greek Text of the Epistle of Paul to the Philippians, ed. W. Young, reprint ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1979), 9. Cf. also Gerald F. Hawthorne, Philippians, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word Publishing, 1983), 20-22; James A. Brooks, “Exposition of Philippians,” Southwestern Journal of Theology, 23 (Fall 1980): 23-36; Donald Guthrie, Epistles from Prison: Philippians, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, Bible Guides, ed. William Barclay and F. F. Bruce (New York: Abingdon Press, 1964), 32; J. B. Lightfoot, St. Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians, reprint ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1965), 84; C. J. Ellicott, A Critical and Grammatical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Philippians, Colossians, and to Philemon (London: Parker, Son, and Bourn, 1861), 7; Dillow, Servant Kings, 205-206; C. R. Erdman, The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians: An Exposition (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1932), 42, finds in 1:6 a promise that the Gospel will continue to advance through the Philippians (and others) until Christ’s return. He uses Matt 24:14 as a cross-reference. Francis X. Malinowski, “The Brave Women of Philippi” Biblical Theology Bulletin 15 (April 1985): 61, defines koinonia in 1:5 as the Philippians’ financial gift to Paul but does not give his opinion of 1:6-7. L. A. Wiesinger, Biblical Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles to the Philippians, to Titus, and the First to Timothy, Clark’s Foreign Theological Library, translated by John Fulton (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1851), 30; Alfred Barry, Ellicott’s Commentary on the Whole Bible, ed. C. J. Ellicott (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n. d.), 8:66; Timothy Dwight’s notes in Meyer, Philippians, 47-48, favor this view.

Some authors understand 1:6 to suggest both salvation and participation in the advance of the Gospel. George Panikulam, Koinonia in the New Testament: A Dynamic Expression of Christian Life (Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1979), 82-84, finds 1:5-7 to express the entire response of the Philippians to the Gospel--their acceptance, spread of, and life in the Gospel. Marvin R. Vincent, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon, International Critical Commentary (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1897), 8, sees the beginning of the “good work” to be their reception of the Gospel (salvation), and the carrying forward to the day of Christ to involve their participation in the promotion of the Gospel.

16 Robert C. Swift, “The Theme and Structure of Philippians,” Bibliotheca Sacra 141 (July-September 1984): 237.

17Hodges, Siege, 95. Hodges’s understanding has the advantage of handling the singular ergon agathon (“good work”) quite naturally.

18 Robert Jewett, “The Epistolary Thanksgiving and the Integrity of Philippians,” Novum Testamentum 12 (1970): 49; William Hendriksen, Exposition of Philippians (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1962), 37-38; Vincent, Philippians, xxxi; Eadie, Philippians, xxx; Loveday Alexander, “Hellenistic Letter-Forms and the Structure of Philippians,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 37 (1989): 94-95, finds a structure but not a theme.

19 Swift, “Theme and Structure,” 236.

20Doxology (cf. 1:11b, “to the glory and praise of God”) and an eschatological climax (cf. 1:10b, “until the day of Christ”) are two characteristics that finalize the epistolary introduction. Disclosure formulas such as found in 1:12 (“Now I want you to know, brethren, that . . .”) are frequently used to introduce a new development in an epistle. Jack T. Sanders, “The Transition From Opening Epistolary Thanksgiving to Body in the Letters of the Pauline Corpus,” Journal of Biblical Literature 81 (1962): 355, 361.

21 It is debated whether the body of the letter begins with 1:12 or 1:27. Duane F. Watson, “A Rhetorical Analysis of Philippians and Its Implications for the Unity Question,” Novum Testamentum 30 (1988): 61, finds 1:3-26 as the exordium. But it is common to take the disclosure formula in 1:12 as the transition into the body of the letter. Compare L.Gregory Bloomquist, The Function of Suffering in Philippians (Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press, 1993), 147; Ben Witherington III, Friendship and Finances In Philippi: The Letter of Paul to the Philippians (Valley Forge, PA: Trinity Press International, 1994), 7, 43. See also n. 20 above.

22Paul Schubert, Form and Function of the Pauline Thanksgivings (Berlin: A. Topelmann, 1939), 25-26, 76-77; Jewett, “Epistolary Thanksgiving,” 53; David E. Garland, “Philippians 1:1-26: The Defense and Confirmation of the Gospel,” Review and Expositor 77 (1980): 328; Robert W. Funk, “The Letter: Form and Style,” in Language, Hermeneutic, and the Word of God (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1966), 257, 269; Ronald Russell, “Pauline Letter Structure in Philippians,” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 25 (September 1982): 306. Schubert (ibid., 77) sees 1:5 and 1:7 as “topic sentences which find their development in the body of the letter.”

23 Swift, “Theme and Structure,” 236-37. Several rhetorical analyses locate the central proposition or theme of the book at 1:27-30; Watson, “Philippians,” 59, 65; Witherington, Philippians, 53.

24 Ibid., 237-38. A defense of his theme or how it is unfolded within the letter is the purpose of Swift’s entire article.

25 Jewett, “Epistolary Thanksgiving,” 53.

26 The harmony of 1:3-11 with 4:10-20 is a vivid illustration of the unity of the epistle. To the contrary, some scholars such as John L. White, The Form and Function of the Body of the Greek Letter, second edition corrected (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1972), 75, and Funk, “Letter,” 272, and Dieter Georgi, Remembering the Poor: The History of Paul’s Collection for Jerusalem (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1992), 63, 67, argue for the composite nature of the letter. For a brief bibliography of those works that defend multiple letters or the unity of the book, see Watson, “Philippians,” 80, nn. 107 and 108. Watson (84, 88) offers the rhetorical analysis of the book as settling the debate in favor of unity.

27 William J. Dalton. “The Integrity of Philippians,” Biblica 60 (1979): 101, comments, “Thus we have four common elements at the beginning and the end of the letter. It does seem fitting that the central idea should be that of partnership, since in fact this theme dominates the whole text.” Also noting this inclusio is Peter T. O’Brien, “Divine Provision for our Needs: Assurance from Philippians 4” Reformed Theological Review (January-April 1991): 28; cf. also Schubert, Form, 77.

28 Martin, Philippians, TNTC, 47, also regards these two phrases to be identical in meaning.

29 Sanders, “Epistolary Thanksgiving,”360, n. 14, observing this parallel between 1:3 and 4:10, comments, “Probably there was no material distinction made among early Christians between rejoicing and giving thanks.” Schubert, Form, 77 also parallels these words. The synonymous nature of the two words is demonstrated in Phlm 4 with 7 and 1 Thess 5:16 with 17. Cf. also Silva, Philippians, 235; Gerald W. Peterman, “‘Thankless Thanks’: The Epistolary Social Convention in Philippians 4:10-20,” Tyndale Bulletin 42 (1991): 269.

30 Cf. Luke 6:27, “do good [kalos poieite] to those who hate you”; cf. also Matt 5:44 (Majority Text); 12:12. In a book about good works, Jas 2:8, 19 should be allowed to carry this nuance. For a similar phrase but with kalon instead, note Gal 6:9, “let us not lose heart in doing good [kalon poiountes]”; see also Rom 7:21; 2 Cor 13:7; Jas 4:17.

31 Kent, “Philippians,” 108, specifies the same phrase in 1:11 as the time when believers will be evaluated to determine the value of the fruit they have produced in their lives. Cf. also Michael, Philippians, 13; Lightfoot, Philippians, 83.

32 Panikulam, Koinonia, 84, suggests this for the 4:17-19 passage.

33 Phronein (“to think”) and logizesthai (“to consider”) seem to overlap in meaning. Of three places where they fall within a close range of each other, two of them are found in Philippians (3:13 and 15; 4:8 and 10). In 1 Cor 13:11, the other close proximity of the two words, an overlap also seems evident.

34 The Greek words (or cognates), thysia (“sacrifice”) and leitourgia (“service”), undoubtedly imply the giving of money in Philippians (2:25, 30; 4:18) and elsewhere (2 Cor 9:12; Rom 15:27). Cf. Colin O. Buchanan, “Epaphroditus’ Sickness and the Letter to the Philippians,” Evangelical Quarterly 36 (1964): 158-59.

35 Further parallels between 4:10-20 and Paul’s prayer in 1:9-11 need not be discussed.

³⁶ Also cited by Dalton; see n. 23 above.

³⁷ Ibid.

³⁸ Ibid.

³⁹ The phrase phronein (“to think”) plus hyper (“on behalf of”) appears in the NT only in 1:7 and 4:10, making the passages purposefully interrelated (David E. Garland, “The Composition and Unity of Philippians,” Novum Testamentum 27 [1985]: 162, n. 75). By showing the Philippians how much he loved them, Paul hoped to gain their continued affection for him and partnership with him. Cf. Reumann, “Contributions,” 455, who calls the two uses of this phrase “friendship language.”

⁴⁰ Schubert, Form, 77, cites the parallel of 1:3 with 4:10 and 18. But see n. 32 above.

⁴¹ Also cited by Dalton; see n. 23 above.

42 It is attractive to translate epi pase te mneia hymon (“in all my remembrance of you,” 1:3, NASB) rather as a reference to the Philippians’ love for Paul (“for all your remembrance of me”), taking hymon as a subjective genitive. Peter T. O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977), 41-46; Schubert, Form, 71-82; Volf, Perseverance, 42, n. 206; Ralph P. Martin, Philippians, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, ed. R. V. G. Tasker (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1959), 59-60; Jewett, “Epistolary Thanksgiving,” 53; Garland, “Defense,” 329-30; Reumann, “Contributions,” 411. Schubert and O’Brien argue quite convincingly for this viewpoint. But the use of the noun mneia (“remembrance”) with a genitive personal pronoun is always objective in the NT and the LXX. Cf. 1 Thess 1:2 and Phlm 4, where the construction appears in an introductory thanksgiving. See Hawthorne, Philippians, 16-17; Fee, Philippians, 77-79. The Philippians’ love for Paul comes later in the introduction (1:7).

43 Scholars widely agree that in 1:5 epi has a causal force; Schubert, Form, 73.

44 Roger L. Omanson, “A Note on the Translation of Philippians 1:3-5,” Bible Translator 29 (April 1978): 244-45; Schubert, Form, 61, 73; Panikulam, Koinonia, 82. Cf. the Amplified, RSV (but not the NRSV), “thankful for your partnership.” Vincent, Philippians, 6, holds that (1) eucharisteo (“I give thanks”) is left without an object unless it is tied to 1:5, and (2) deesis (“petition”) plus poioumai (“I make”) is never found with epi (“for, because of”) to mark the cause for prayer. The partnership of the Philippians is not the cause of Paul’s petition (1:4) but the cause of his thanksgiving to God (1:3). For similar constructions where epi plus the dative follows eucharisteo or a cognate and expresses the object of thanks, see 2 Cor 9:15 and 1 Cor 1:4. On the other hand, others connect 1:5 with what immediately precedes: “I make my petition with joy because of your partnership.” Translations reflecting this construction with 1:4 include NIV, NEB, TEV. For the best defense of this latter viewpoint, see Kent, “Philippians,” 107. Cf. also Hawthorne, Philippians, 18-19; Fee, Philippians, 75-76.

45 Cf. Lightner, “Philippians,” 649; Reumann, “Contributions,” 441; Kent, “Philippians,” 105; Lenski, Philippians, 707-709.

46 J. Y. Campbell, “koinwnia and Its Cognates in the New Testament,” Journal of Biblical Literature 51 (1932): 353.

47 Fee, Philippians, 82, makes an unnecessary distinction between sharing something in common with another and partnership.

48 William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, translated by Walter Bauer, second edition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), s.v.Koinoneo 438 (hereafter referred to as BAGD), list Phil 4:15 under the meaning, “give or contribute a share.” Under koinonia, their entry (ibid., 438-39) states “abstr. for concr. sign of fellowship, proof of brotherly unity, even gift, contribution.” Romans 15:26 is listed here, but 2 Cor 8:4 should also be included. A few texts that may have connotations of sharing financially or materially are regularly overlooked. Contextually, Acts 2:42 (koinonia) carries this significance. In the early church, believers continued to have all things in “common” (koinos, Acts 2:44; 4:32), evidencing a unique unity. Other passages that directly or indirectly relate to money include Rom 11:17 (“fellow partners,” synkoinonos, where money is implied in piotes, “rich”), Rom 15:27 (koinoneo, “to share”; cf. 15:26), Gal 6:6 (koinonew), 1 Tim 6:18 (koinonikos = “generous”), and Heb 13:16 (koinonia; cf. 13:5). Cf. also Phlm 17 (see v 18) and Luke 5:10 where Simon, James, and John were “partners” (koinonoi) in business.

49 A small sample includes “contribution,” “contribute,” and “contributing” in Rom 12:13 (koinoneo) of the RSV, NRSV, NASB; in Rom 15:26 (koinonia) of the RSV, NASV, NKJV, KJV; and in 2 Cor 9:13 (koinonia) of the RSV, NASB. The words “distribution” and “distributing” are found in 2 Cor 9:13 of the KJV and in Rom 12:13 of the NKJV.

50 Fee, Philippians, 91, n. 7, wants koinonia and synkoinonoi/synkoinoneoto be synonymous. But we side with Campbell, “koinonia,” 363: “The very existence of the compound suggests that the idea of association with someone else was not always felt to be expressed plainly by koinonia; otherwise there would have been no point in using the compound . . .”

51 This is all the more dramatic when it is considered that the compounds, synkoinoneo and synkoinonos are rare. The noun appears elsewhere only in Rom 11:17 and 1 Cor 9:23; the verb appears elsewhere only in Eph 3:11.

52 Bloomquist, Philippians, 145, views 1:7 as simply a fuller expression of 1:5. Panikulam, Koinonia, 84, reasons that v 7 in context confirms the fact that koinonia must go beyond mere spiritual, mystical union with Christ.

53 The other two uses (both are koinonia) may also have some allusion to the Philippian gift. In Phil 2:1 koinonia (koinonia pneumatos, “fellowship of the Spirit”) is cited in BAGD, 439 under the definition, “generosity, fellow-feeling, altruism.” Therefore, pneumatos is not an objective genitive (“if there is any partaking of the Spirit”; Fee, Philippians, 191), but a genitive of source or origin (“if there is any generosity inspired by the Spirit”) or a subjective genitive (“partnership prompted by the Spirit”; Hawthorne, Philippians;Kent, “Philippians,” 121; Silva, Philippians, 103). In Phil 3:10, Paul’s desire to share (koinonia) Christ’s sufferings must be understood in light of his commission to advance the Gospel; Victor C. Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif: Traditional Athletic Imagery in the Pauline Literature (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1967), 116-119, 145, 150. Paul’s sufferings in prison are described as undergone for the sake of the Gospel (1:7, 12-13, 16) and the Philippians’ gift is described as a partnership with Paul in his sufferings (synkoinoneo, 4:14). The Philippians are bound together with Paul in this common task of advancing the Good News. Combining 3:10 with 4:14 shows the continuity between the apostle’s struggle for the Gospel and the similar struggle of the Philippians specifically mentioned in 1:30. Suffering is only the negative aspect of the struggle. Among other things, their struggle for the Gospel particularly involved an active participation with Paul through their sacrificial giving even in times of poverty (cf. 2 Cor 8:2). The common struggle described in 1:30 does not demand an identity of action with Paul, e.g., persecution or suffering (ibid., 122). This is evident in 4:14, where the Philippians “shared” Paul’s affliction exclusively by their sacrificial gift to him. Cf. Campbell, “KOINONIA,” 361, 366. So, Paul’s request to know the koinonia of Christ’s sufferings (3:10) may be an indirect challenge for the Philippians to continue their sacrificial giving (i.e., their struggle/suffering) for the sake of promoting the Gospel, even though he is in prison. If he longed for the benefits of experiencing these sufferings, they were certainly right in longing to participate with him financially in these sufferings. Through giving to Paul’s Gospel, they too were “sharing Christ’s suffering” (3:10).

54 In 1 Cor 1:9 koinonia is the most frequently cited reference in this regard. If the uses in the rest of the book (10:16, 18, 20; cf. also 9:23) are allowed to impact 1:9, the meaning takes a different turn entirely. The only other verses that could be claimed are 1 Pet 5:1, 2 Pet 1:4, and 1 John 1:3, 6-7. While an extended defense cannot be offered, 1 Pet 5:1 most likely speaks of a future reward. The sharing in the divine nature in 2 Pet 1:4 relates to sanctification, i.e., becoming like Christ (see the context in 1:5-11). First John 1:3, 6-7 deal with the issue of the believer’s present intimacy or harmony (“fellowship”) with Christ. In the context of 1 John 1, the two conditions for koinonia are walking in the light and confessing our sins--conditions that are never mentioned in the Gospel of John or any NT text as conditions for salvation. Faith and salvation are a prerequisite to this koinonia, not its essence.

55 Panikulam, Koinonia, 82, refers to this construction as a “dynamic activity in progress.” O’Brien, Thanksgiving, 24, n. 22, calls the use of euangelion in 1:5 and throughout the book a nomen actionis. Cf. also Lightfoot, Philippians, 81.

56 Hawthorne, Philippians, 19; O’Brien, Thanksgiving, 24-25; Panikulam, Koinonia, 82; Wiesinger, Philippians, 29-30; Bloomquist, Philippians, 145; contra F. Hauck, s.v. “Koino,” Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, ed. Gerhard Kittel, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965), 3:805 (hereafter referred to as TDNT), who sees the phrase as “participation in the saving message of Christ.” Every other context in which koinonia is followed by eis (“to, toward”) is a context with monetary concerns (Phil 4:15; Rom 15:26; 2 Cor 8:4; 9:13). Fee resists this implication, reasoning that the use of koinonia followed by eis in 2 Cor 9:13 and Rom 15:26 is distinct. (Neither Fee nor Hawthorne mentions the same construction in 2 Cor 8:4.) In his view, these verses speak of gifts given to (eis) people, while Phil 1:5 has in view a partnership for the furtherance of the Gospel--not a gift to Paul. Fee’s perspective presents an artificial distinction between a gift to Paul and a gift to advance Paul’s Gospel. The verb koinoneo followed by eis is used in Phil 4:15 of a gift to Paul’s preaching ministry, but is treated identically to the recent Philippian gift to his needs (4:14, 18).

57 Hawthorne, Philippians, 19. On the same page, he clarifies his point: “This understanding of koinonia does not exclude, however, a reference to the Philippians’ faith, their own efforts at evangelism, nor to their intercession for the progress of the gospel in the world.” Cf. also Campbell, “KOINONIA,” 371.

58 Theodor Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament, translated by Melancthon Williams Jacobus and John M. Trout et al., reprint ed. (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1953), 1:524, does not believe that at this time the Philippian church was undergoing extensive persecution. The agon (“struggle”) of 1:30 is much broader than suffering. See n. 43 above. Cf. also Watson, “Philippians,” 78, contra Bloomquist, Philippians, 158, who finds the Philippians’ suffering more extensive.

59 Fee, Philippians, 84, seems guilty of circular reasoning. First, he reads his interpretation of 1:6 (salvation) into 1:5: “In light of v. 6, this might even include ‘participation’ by themselves having responded to the gospel and thus becoming Christ’s people in Philippi.” Later he reads this conclusion from v 5 back into v 6. Objecting that v 6 refers to the material support of the Philippians (ibid., 85), he argues: “The clause is best understood, however, in terms of their relationship to Christ and the gospel in the broader sense argued for in v. 5.”

60 Contra Panikulam, Koinonia, 84; Fee, Philippians, 83, n. 51, 88. Many who include the Philippian gift as the signal evidence of the koinonia (but do not take the term to specify salvation), also emphasize that the term is to be understood in a wide sense that includes suffering, evangelism, etc.; O’Brien, Thanksgiving, 24-25; Lightfoot, Philippians, 81.

61 On the other hand, they may not have suffered for the Gospel but used this to despise others who did. Since Paul was being persecuted for the Gospel, they may have rejected him as spiritually weak, and taken pride in their strength and fleshly achievements (cf. 3:2-16); Garland, “Defense,” 332-33.

62 Cf. Pfitzner, Agon Motif, 118. See also n. 43 above.

63 When the Philippians gave to the Jerusalem collection, they also gave themselves to the apostle, demonstrating their affection for him through giving (2 Cor 8:5). In 2 Corinthians, their affection and their gift are common elements in koinonia.

64 Prayer, however, is not clearly identified with koinonia in Philippians. But Rom 15:30 confirms the role of prayer in a cooperative struggle with Paul for the Gospel; Pfitzner, Agon Motif, 122; O’Brien, Thanksgiving, 199.

65 The other factor specifically mentioned as a constituent element of koinonia is grace (1:7). This will be discussed in the second part of this article.

66 “The article ‘the’ [in the Greek phrase, achritou nyn, “until the now”] is a delicate Pauline finger pointing to the gift which the Philippians had just sent . . .”; Wuest, “Philippians,” 32. Cf. also Wiesinger, Philippians, 30-31.

67 According to Barth, Philippians, 15-16, koinonia in conjunction with “until now” must be a “second allusion [besides 1:3] to the financial support received.”

68 It is not impossible for Paul to lump a significant portion of the congregation together as having experienced salvation within the same short period of time (i.e., the first few weeks of his initial outreach among them during his second missionary journey). However, this would require taking hemera (“day”) in a broad sense. Against the broad sense of “day” is the fact that hemera is modified by “first” (protes). The only other reference to this Greek phrase, “first day,” on the lips of Paul is actually the identical prepositional phrase (lacking the article), apo protes hemeras, in Acts 20:18 (“from the first day that I set foot in Asia”). Here it appears rather literal and expresses a fresh beginning in Paul’s ministry--similar to Phil 1:5 taken in light of 4:15 (see n. 67 above). No non-literal examples can be found in the NT in which hemera is used with an ordinal. Cf. Paul’s literal use of oktaemeros (“eighth day”) in Phil 3:5. Grayston, Philippians, 81, and Kent “Philippians,” 105, suggest that the “day” relates to the day the church was founded. One may stress a literal day with this approach. But only Lydia and her household were won to the Lord that specific day (Acts 16:14, 15). The jailer and his household came to faith “many days” later (see Acts 16:18 and the incident of the slave girl, which chronologically precedes the jailer’s salvation). If the “first day” represents the beginning of the Philippians’ evangelistic efforts, one must also minimize the phrase. Cf. O’Brien, Thanksgiving, 25, n. 27, who suggests that “one ought not to press the expression ‘from the first day until now,’ as though the Philippians became missionaries at the very moment they believed.”

69 Dalton, “Integrity of Philippians,” 101, and Schubert, Form, 77, also link 4:15 with 1:7 as noted above.

70 Cf. 4:15 in the Amplified ( “in the early days of the Gospel ministry”) and the NEB (“in the early days of my mission”). In the nine uses of euangelion in Phil (1:5, 7, 12, 16, 27; 2:22; 4:3, 15), the stress surely falls on the progress and vindication of the Gospel, not on its content or reception. Cf. Grayston, Philippians, 81.

71 For a similar approach, see Reumann, “Contributions,” 440. Georgi, Remembering the Poor, 191, n. 42, translates, “But, Philippians, you also know that when first starting out on [my] mission [that is to say], when setting out from Macedonia . . .” The phrase, en archetoueuangeliou (4:15, lit. “at [in] the beginning of the gospel”; NASB “at the first preaching of the gospel”) does not describe when Paul departed from Macedonia or the reception of the Gospel by the Philippians (NIV, “in the early days of your acquaintance with the gospel, when I set out from Macedonia”). It describes the time and circumstances in Paul’s ministry when the Philippians made their gift. We might paraphrase, “No other church was a partner with me financially when I left Macedonia and began again to preach the gospel.” The NASB would reflect this viewpoint more clearly if the comma between “gospel” and “after” were deleted: “at the first preaching of the gospel after I departed from Macedonia, no church shared with me . . .” This perspective takes the aorist, exelthon, in a pluperfect sense (“after I had left”); Fee, Philippians, 441, n. 13. When Paul left Macedonia for Corinth and began to preach the Gospel again, he was backed financially by the Philippians (2 Cor 11:8-9). This understanding of the phrase, en arche tou euangeliou (4:15), seems to have eluded many commentators. They then struggle with how Paul thought of his ministry in Philippi as the “beginning” of the Gospel. Cf. Ralph P. Martin, Philippians, New Century Bible (Greenwood, SC: Attic Press, 1976), 165; Hawthorne, Philippians, 203-204. Or they explain the awkwardness of the sentence as “careless” or “casual” because Paul could not have literally entered into partnership with them (i.e., began a close friendship with them at their salvation) after he left Macedonia; Fee, Philippians, 441, n. 13. By switching the clauses, the TEV contributes to the confusion: “that when I left Macedonia, in the early days of preaching the Good News.” These problems are all solved if we conceive of the beginning (=the preaching) of the Gospel mentioned in 4:15 to take place after Paul left Macedonia.

72 Kent, “Philippians,” 156, is correct in viewing 4:15 as the more substantial gift, given to Paul at Corinth. Then Paul recalls (4:16) the earlier, smaller gifts that were given even while he was in Thessalonica. This is supported by statements in the Thessalonian epistles where Paul explains that he needed to work for his living while staying there (1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:7-8). This interpretation gives full weight to the ascensive force of the first kai (“even in Thessalonica”) in the sentence.

73 In 4:16, the NIV reads, “again and again,” implying repeated times. Leon Morris “kai hapax kai dis”Novum Testamentum 1 (1956): 205-208, followed by Reumann, “Contributions,” 439-40, suggests that in 4:16, the first two uses of kai are to be taken as correlative and translated, “Both (kai) in Thessalonica and (kai) more than once [in other places].” If this reading is correct, Paul received one gift while at Thessalonica and several gifts elsewhere. Under this interpretation, he could have received support while in Berea, but none while in Corinth. Fee, Philippians, 445, is probably right to reject this way of handling the idiom. Paul definitely received Philippian aid while at Corinth (2 Cor 11:9); Reumann, “Contributions,” 440.

74“No other Pauline community of which we know had so good a record in financial benevolence”; Reumann, “Contributions,” 453. Philippi may not have been the only assembly to give to Paul’s needs, but at least the only one that gave specifically toward the advance of the Gospel when he entered Achaia. The stress in the passage is that the Philippians gave to Paul’s apostolic ministry at the very point that he began his outreach beyond their own region, Macedonia. The collection for the poor believers in Jerusalem is not directly mentioned in Phil 4. Second Corinthians 11:8 (“I robbed other churches by receiving support from them,” NIV) may imply that another church from Macedonia (perhaps Thessalonica) personally assisted Paul. But with regard to the collection, little or no mention is made elsewhere of other churches in Macedonia which made a contribution; Richard R. Melick , Jr., “The Collection for the Saints: 2 Corinthians 8-9,” Criswell Theological Review 4 (1989): 106. If the letter to the Galatians was written early, they were instructed in giving to those who taught them the Scriptures (Gal 6:6-8; cf. also 1 Cor 16:1). But no record exists that they ever supported Paul.

75 Epistles were consciously designed for public as well as private reading. D. Brent Sandy, “Form and Function in the Letters of the New Testament,” New Testament Essays in Honor of Homer A. Kent, Jr., ed. Gary T. Meadors (Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books, 1991), 54-55.

Editor’s Note: This study on Judges originated from a handout and class notes in Dr. Robert Chisholm’s Hebrew class at Dallas Theological Seminary.

Background

Today we are going to study the book of Judges, but I think it always helps to understand the context of a book before you study it, so first I want to show how Judges fits into the history of the nation of Israel.

• Genesis—We all know of the captivity in Egypt which began at the end of Genesis.
• Exodus—Then the Israelites leave Egypt in the book of Exodus and God gives the 10 Commandments.
• Leviticus deals with the law in more detail.
• In Numbers the Israelites are supposed to move into the promised land and take possession of it, but they are afraid of the report by the 10 spies and won’t trust God, so God sends them out into the wilderness till all the grown-ups die except Joshua and Caleb.
• In Deuteronomy God brings them back to mount Sinai and expounds His covenant with them and promises to bless them if they follow Him and curse them if they don’t follow Him.
• In the book of Joshua they begin the conquest. Joshua leads them until he dies, and that is where the book of Judges begins—with the death of Joshua.

You need to understand that the people were unable to take total possession of the land under Joshua and even for years after his death. Why do you think that was so?

Judges 1:19 gives the Israelites perspective for why this was so.

19 Now the Lord was with Judah, and they took possession of the hill country; but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley because they had iron chariots.

Do you think that was the real reason that the Israelites couldn’t kick the enemy out? Did chariots stop God from killing the Egyptians at the Red Sea? The rest of chapter 1 and 2 give an account of how they failed to drive out the enemy.

Judges 2:2-3 & 20-23 give God’s perspective on their failure.

2:1 Now the angel of the Lord came up from Gilgal to Bochim. And he said, “I brought you up out of Egypt and led you into the land which I have sworn to your fathers; and I said, ‘I will never break My covenant with you, 2 and as for you, you shall make no covenant with the inhabitants of this land; you shall tear down their altars.’ But you have not obeyed Me; what is this you have done? 3 Therefore I also said, ‘I will not drive them out before you; but they shall become as thorns in your sides, and their gods shall be a snare to you.’”

So, we see the real reason is disobedience and lack of faith in God.

Judges 3:5-6 sums up for us how the Israelites handled the test.

5 And the sons of Israel lived among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; 6 and they took their daughters for themselves as wives, and gave their own daughters to their sons, and served their gods. 7 And the sons of Israel did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, and forgot the Lord their God, and served the Baals and the Asheroth.

Principle: If you hang around with bad people, you will pick up their bad habits.

Summary

So the book of Judges is all about the various tribes of Israel living among her enemies and being oppressed by one enemy after another. When things got really bad, God would raise up a judge who would lead a military campaign and defeat that particular enemy and there would be peace for a few years and the cycle would begin again. What we basically see in Judges is six of these cycles. In each one, things got a little worse. It really would be better to describe the cycles as a downward spiral.

Approaching Judges as Literature

Often we go to the Bible and look for theological propositions, or do a character study on some individual—like Elijah, Joseph or Gideon, and ignore the narrative sections or stories, but there is a lot to learn from the narrative parts of the Bible. One thing that is very helpful is to look at the Bible as a piece of literature and not just a book full of theological statements. It certainly makes it more enjoyable, but more importantly, it helps discover what points the author may be trying to make.

One of the literary things to look for is repetition of phrases. We will see that in Judges. Another thing to look for is what the author does with character roles. I think an evaluation of the various characters in Judges points to something significant. I think the book of Judges demonstrates (in a negative manner) the importance of competent leadership to the people of God. Although God raised up several judges or leaders to accomplish military victories, many failed miserably in other respects. Despite their military successes, the spiritual climate in Israel grew bitterly cold as violence and anarchy swept through society. The book’s final chapters include a sordid account of idolatry, gang rape, civil war and kidnapping. The book concludes with the somber words, “In those days Israel had no king; everyone did as he saw fit” (21:25; 17:6; 18:1; 19:1). This set the stage for the rise of Samuel and David, through whom God restored some semblance of covenantal loyalty and societal order.

You cannot read through the book of Judges without noticing that women appear at several strategic points in the narrative. They assume a variety of roles, including heroine, seductress and innocent victim, among others. Their changing roles throughout the book contribute powerfully to the book’s portrayal of the disintegration of Israelite society. The portrait culminates in 1 Samuel 1 with the oppressed figure of Hannah, through whom the Lord reverses the downward spiral detailed in Judges and brings to realization the leadership ideal presented at the beginning of the book.¹

Our study will examine the interrelationship between the male and female characters in Judges and seek to explain:

• how the changing function of the women characters provides a key to understanding the book’s overall evaluation of Israel’s male leadership during this time period.
• how two of the women characters set the stage for the appearance of Hannah in a particularly pointed manner.

I have divided the book into several sections. One thing that helped me divide the book was the repetition of the phrase, “Then the sons of Israel again did evil in the sight of the Lord…”

We see it in:

• 3:7 before Othniel is introduced
• 3:12 before Ehud is introduced
• 4:1 before Deborah and Barak
• 6:1 before the account of Gideon
• 10:6 before Jephthah is introduced
• 13:1 before the story of Samson

It turns out that if you divide the book according to the roles of the women in the book, these divisions coincide fairly well with the introductory phrases.

• 1-3 A warrior wins a wife and a father blesses his daughter
• 4-5 A courageous woman lures a foreign warrior to his death
• 6-9 A woman delivers Israel from a power hungry oppressor
• 10-12 An Israelite warrior wins a battle but brings a curse upon his daughter
• 13-16 A foreign woman lures an Israelite warrior to his death
• 17-21 Israelite women oppressed by their countrymen

A Warrior Wins a Wife
and a Father Blesses His Daughter
(Judges 1-3)

In the first part of chapter 1 we see that Joshua dies and the Israelites go on to take control of part of the promised land. By the end of chapter 3 we are introduced to the exploits of Othniel, Ehud and Shamgar. These three judges bravely deliver Israel from foreign oppressors. Though the accounts are brief, the author paints a picture of militarily effective men who display daring and courage.

Let’s look at them in detail.

Othniel

We are introduced to Othniel first in 1:13 when he takes part in the military campaign led by Caleb.

In 1:13 he presents Othniel as a divinely empowered warrior who demonstrates military efficiency in an almost matter-of-fact way. When Caleb offered his daughter to the one who captures Kiriath-sepher, vs. 13 simply says, “And Othniel captured it.”

Verse 1:14 probably says in your Bible that Achsah persuaded Othniel to ask her father for a field, but this is a bad translation of the Hebrew. The “to him” is not in the Hebrew. The NIV goes as far as to translate this as, “she came to Othniel.” They took a lot of liberty with the text, as they are wont to do.

This is more properly translated as such, “Then it came about, when she came, that she persuaded him (her father) by asking for a field.” (We are introduced to what is about to take place, then we see the action…) “Then she alighted from her donkey, and Caleb said to her, ‘What do you want?’”

I want to spend the time correcting this translation because I think it is important to understand that Othniel is no weak or greedy man asking his father-in-law for a handout. Instead, it is Achsah asking for a dowry from her father.

It is here that I want to draw the information for the first main section which emphasizes the warrior like character of Othniel and the blessing of a father for his daughter.

The Father’s Blessing

It might seem to us at first that Caleb is not treating his daughter very well when he offers her as the prize for bravery, But we need to recognize that Caleb’s challenge to the soldiers would ensure that his daughter married a strong and brave man who would more than likely be the leader of the family and provide for her. I think we can also conclude that if this warrior took the city, it would be because he had faith in God. That was the only way the Israelites ever won a battle. So the chances were also good that Caleb would be providing a man of God for his daughter. So, I conclude from this section that Caleb is going to find a good husband for his daughter.

Caleb’s gift to his daughter also illustrates the protective concern which fathers should display towards their wives and daughters.

The reason I am pointing this out about Caleb is because later we will see a father who makes a similar promise, but with tragic consequences for his daughter (10-12:). We will also see that the men of Israel degenerate to the place where they are oppressing their own women and not taking care of them.

Achsah is a role model of the maiden won by bravery in battle. This will contrast sharply with the role of women in the end of the book. It’s like something out of a King Arthur movie. But this was written long before the Knights of the Round Table. Next time you see a King Arthur movie, you will say, “Hey, that’s like something out of the Bible.”

So we have a model warrior, a brave leader and a woman who benefits from his leadership.

The Model Leader

First I want to point out that not much is written about Othniel. But this is normal if an author wants to portray a character as an ideal or model for others. The author doesn’t want us to know everything about him, especially his mistakes or weaknesses. He is a role model.

For the author of Judges, Othniel is a model of the ideal warrior who follows Joshua’s directive, bravely defeats the enemy and takes the land God has given his people.

After reading about Othniel in chapter 1, we see that the Israelites did a sorry job of ridding the land of enemies.

In 3:7-11 we will read of more of Othniel’s exploits as he defeats Cushan-Rishathaim. Again, we are not told much about him or how he did it. We are simply told that he delivered the nation. Unfortunately, no Israelite warrior would fully measure up to the ideal established by Othniel until David emerges hundreds of years later.

Ehud 3:12-30

In the story of Ehud we have a brave and cunning warrior who tricks the enemy and we read all the gory details. We might be repulsed by his actions, but to the Israelite audience this would have been comical and inspirational. Ehud is another example of a brave warrior who trusts God (cf. 3:28) and defeats one of the enemies of the nation.

Shamgar 3:31

Not much is said about Shamgar, so we can’t draw too many conclusions about him. But I do think we can assume that since he is associated with Othniel and Ehud, that he is to be viewed in a positive light.

To summarize, the book’s first three chapters, while not entirely positive in their assessment of Israel’s early history, paint a somewhat ideal picture of heroic warriors and of an Israelite woman who inspires great deeds and receives a blessing from her father.²

A Courageous Woman
Lures a Foreign Warrior to His Death
(Judges 4-5)

The first thing we see is that a woman is leading Israel at this time. This would raise a question among the readers. What is a woman doing leading? Things must really be bad. They were. There were no men brave enough to lead. Look at Barak’s response to Deborah’s order in vs. 8. “If you will go with me, I will go, but if you will not go, I will not go.” This sounds like some little child talking to his mother. Deborah’s response in verse 9 shows that Barak’s attitude was less than appropriate. Barak would not receive the honor for the victory, but a woman would.

We see that Barak does defeat the enemy, but Sisera, the king, escapes and seeks shelter in the tent of an ally. Here we are introduced to Jael. In spite of her husband’s loyalty to Sisera, she is loyal to Israel. So she invites Sisera into her tent, gives him some milk, tucks him into bed because he is exhausted from fighting all day, and then, while he is sleeping, she drives a tent peg through his head.

In chapter 5 we have a long song commemorating the event. In the song, special praise is given to Jael for defeating Sisera. This could have been sung in Barak’s honor.

We are also introduced to Sisera’s mother in 5:28f. She is seen looking out the window waiting for her son to return. She assumes his delay is because he has defeated the enemy and is raping a woman or two. The irony is that he is being killed by a courageous woman.

What do we learn from the story?

• Barak enjoys success, but he does not display the courage of his predecessors. He demanded military support from a woman.
• We see that Deborah’s words are fulfilled. A woman receives the honor from killing Sisera.
• We see that the warrior ideal established in chapter 3 is carried on by a woman. Jael is courageous, takes decisive action, and her exploits remind us of the crafty Ehud, the lone assassin who used deception to slay a foreign oppressor behind closed doors (3:12-30).
• Like Shamgar, she uses an unconventional weapon. He used an ox goad. She used a tent peg.
• Like Shamgar, she is a foreigner.

By the end of this story, we see that Israel has taken a step backward in terms of male leadership. Fortunately, two women rose to the occasion to compensate for the men’s weakness.

A Woman Delivers Israel
From a Power-Hungry Oppressor
(Judges 6-9)

Next we have the story of Gideon. Probably all of us have heard about Gideon. He is best known for defeating the Midianites with only 300 men.

But Gideon sends us mixed signals. He is full of doubts and fear. He questions and tests God throughout the story. (The testing of God with the fleece is the most famous scene.) But God has patience with him and uses him to destroy the enemy. This can offer encouragement and hope to us that God can use us in spite of our fears and doubts.

But I want to look at Gideon from the perspective that we are studying today—which is declining male leadership.

• Like Barak, Gideon is initially hesitant when called into action. Barak responded to Deborah by saying “If…” Gideon responds with a big “IF” in 6:17. He also does this in 6:36. It is no wonder God says in 7:10, “If you are afraid to go down, go with Purah your servant…”
• He refuses to become king when the people ask him, and I think that is a positive thing, but he turns right around and makes a golden ephod in 8:27. An ephod was an apron that the high priest wore and on it hung a pouch with the Urim and Thummin which were used to determine God’s will. Gideon’s ephod became an object used in the illegal practice of divination. It was an object of idolatrous worship. So he contributes to the spiritual decline of the nation.
• He has many wives and a concubine, which give him 70 sons and another son named Abimelech. There is much contention in the family and Abimelech ends up killing all his brothers and declaring himself in charge. He, in fact, had no inheritance rights because his mother was a concubine. Abimelech went on to terrorize the countryside.

At this point the next important woman enters the story. When Abimelech was at Thebez a woman threw a millstone down on his head (9:53). The text emphasizes she did this by herself and that she “threw” the millstone. This suggests an heroic act of strength and casts the woman in the role of a warrior.

My question is, “Why, if all the men and women in the city were in this tower, was it a woman who takes the initiative to kill him?” I think it shows the men were wimps. They had no initiative.

So, in the account of Abimelech’s death, a woman delivers Israel again (once more, ironically, by a fatal blow to the head with an unconventional weapon, cf. 5:26 with 9:53). Only, this time the oppressor is an Israelite. Gooding writes,

Things have seriously deteriorated when the bondage from which Israel has to be delivered in this fashion is no longer a bondage to some foreign power but a bondage to one of Israel’s number, who, instead of being a deliverer of Israel, has installed himself as a tyrant and is maintaining his tyranny by ruthless destruction.

So, what we have seen so far is that the role of the women has changed from one who inspires brave warriors to go into battle, to delivering Israel from the foreign oppressor by herself, to delivering Israel from oppression from one of her own countrymen.

We can see that the leadership is disintegrating. Othniel, Ehud and Shamgar were brave and wise warriors. Barak was not so brave. Gideon was not so brave and not so wise. Now we will look at another leader who was not so brave and very foolish.

An Israelite Warrior Wins a Battle
but Brings a Curse Upon His Daughter
(Judges 10-12)

We have our introductory phrase in 10:6 and then are introduced to Jephthah beginning in 11:1. Immediately we see that Jephthah is a “valiant warrior,” but he was the son of a prostitute. He is like Abimelech in this regard.

His half brothers, the legitimate children ran him off, and he began to associate with “worthless fellows.” But in learning to survive and fend for himself “on the street,” he became stronger in the process, and when things got really bad in the land, the elders asked him and agreed to let him lead the nation if he would help them.

In 11:29 we see that the Spirit of God came to help him, but Jephthah was not as confident in God as he should have been and he made a bargain with God which was very rash. Like Barak and Gideon he uses a big “IF” prior to the battle. The precise wording of the vow indicates that he intended to offer a human sacrifice and not an animal, but he expected it to be a male. (We can deduce this because he used the masculine form.) He only had one child, which was a daughter, so he probably was thinking of a male servant.

The vow proved to be a rash and foolish one, because when he returned, victorious, the first person he saw coming out of his house was his daughter. I think he kept his vow and sacrificed her. There is no reason to think he just sent her to the temple for a life of service to God. The tribute paid to his daughter every year (11:40) seems more appropriate if she was killed, rather than still living.

In contrast to Caleb, who brought blessing on his daughter, Jephthah’s foolishness brought a curse on his daughter.

Finally, in 12:4 we see Jephthah embroiled in a civil war against the Ephraimites. In contrast to Ehud who took the fords of the Jordan against a Gentile army, Jephthah is fighting against fellow Israelites.

Once again the crisis in Israelite leadership is evident. The changing role of the story’s major female character draws attention to this. Now a woman becomes the innocent victim of her own father’s lack of faith and wisdom.

A Foreign Woman Lures
an Israelite Warrior to His Death
(Judges 13-16)

Next we have the story of Samson. He appears to have the qualities necessary for a great leader.

• He is supernaturally conceived which would indicate that God had a special purpose for him.
• Like Othniel, he was divinely empowered, fearless and did not hesitate to attack the Lord’s enemies.
• Like Ehud he has cunning. We can see this because he loves riddles.
• Like Shamgar, he was able to slaughter hundreds, even with an unconventional weapon. If I remember correctly, his weapon of choice was the jawbone of a donkey. I think the significance of the unconventional weapons throughout the book just emphasizes that God was the one who brought victory.

However, we don’t have to look very far to find his weakness which was for women. He marries a Timnite woman. It says that God sanctioned the marriage (14:4). It might mean that God placed the desire for the Timnite woman in Samson’s heart, or it could indicate that God was going to utilize this, without approving of, the marriage. He is involved with a prostitute in Gaza, and he is also involved with another Philistine prostitute, Delilah, which proved to be his downfall.

There is some irony here. 14:2 says Samson “saw” a Timnite woman, and 16:1 says he “saw” a harlot in Gaza. When he is captured by the Philistines, they poke out his eyes so he won’t be “seeing” any more women.

Since we are looking at Judges as a story, we should recognize that in contrast to Jael, who lured a foreign general to his death, a foreign woman, Delilah, lures the greatest of Israel’s warriors to his death. Samson is now in the role of Sisera. God allows Samson to avenge himself, but he dies in the process.

Samson’s death in the Philistine temple makes the decline in Israel’s leadership complete. Deficient faith has given way to lack of wisdom. No more individual leaders appear in the book. The final chapters describe a period of anarchy which surpasses the turmoil produced earlier by Abimelech.

Israelite Women
Oppressed by Their Countrymen
(Judges 17-21)

Without effective spiritual leadership, the people of Israel (like all humans), with their propensity to rebel, fell away from the Lord. Idolatry and civil war take over.

The women in this section play prominent roles as innocent victims. In chapter 19 a Levite, traveling with his concubine (a concubine? That should raise a question in the reader’s mind.) decides it would be safer to spend the night in Israelite territory than in Jebusite territory. Again, more irony. He was wrong. It would have been safer to stay in Jebusite territory. A group of Israelite men come to the place he is staying to have sexual relations with him. (The parallel to Sodom and Gomorrah should be obvious.) He sends his concubine out to satisfy them and they rape her all night and leave her to die.

When the Levite asks the Benjamites to turn over the perpetrators, they refuse, so he cuts up the dead woman into 12 parts and sends her parts to the different tribes and calls the other tribes to help him and civil war breaks out. The Benjamites are almost wiped out. The cities, women and children are destroyed and only 600 men escape. So that the tribe of Benjamin will not become extinct, the other tribes annihilate the town of Jabesh Gilead, who would not take part in the civil war, give 400 virgins to the 600 Benjamites and then send the other 200 Benjamites to Shiloh to kidnap 200 more women dancing in the vineyard during the harvest celebration.

It is ironic and deplorable that the nation has stooped so low. Although the Israelites supposedly abhorred what the Benjamites did to the Levite’s concubine, they repeated on a mass scale, the same crimes.

Summary

Israel’s moral decline is complete. Women in the beginning of the book inspired men to great deeds, then they played the role of national deliverers—first from external oppressors and then from internal oppressors. Now they are being raped, kidnapped and slaughtered by their own countrymen. Compare the end of the story with the story of Sisera. In the beginning the threat to the women was from outside the land. It was Sisera’s men who would have raped the women if they had won the battle, but now we see that the decline in male leadership is so bad that Israelite men are oppressing their own women.

Application

How does all this apply to us?

• I think the things we’ve seen show us how important it is to have faith in God and the initiative to step out in faith and take action. Remember Othniel who did have faith in contrast to Gideon and Barak who didn’t.
• We have also seen that God was able to use men who didn’t have very much faith (Gideon).
• One message of Judges is that one person can make a difference. The Bible is big on community, but there are times when God uses individuals to accomplish His will.
• The issue of male leadership may be the main point of the book.

People often turn to the book of Judges to prove that it is okay for women to lead, but I think you can see from these stories that the men were weak and not doing what they were supposed to. Deborah, Jael, and the woman who killed Abimelech were great. I can find no fault with them. But what we’ve seen shows that this society is actually in decline. When the opportunities for women to lead arise, it is actually a sign that something is wrong.

The issue of male leadership is especially prevalent in our day. It is almost a dirty word to many people. A few diehard conservative Christians still believe in it, but not too many others. It certainly is not politically correct. But we can see that the problem of male leadership is a common problem throughout the Bible.

It began with Adam. He was not leading when he ate the fruit. He was following Eve’s lead. I know most of you have heard the explanation of Gen. 3:16 which says the woman’s desire would be to rule over her husband, but that God wanted the man to lead. It is man’s natural inclination to back down and not take the initiative. God has made us this way so that the only way we can succeed as leaders is by stepping out in faith and trusting Him to catch us when we fall or fail. And we will fail. We will make bad decisions. That is why we don’t take the lead. We are afraid. When men fail to take the lead, women usually step right in and do it. They often do a good job too, but this is not God’s ideal, and the end result is ruin.

What is the biggest reason for not taking the lead? — Fear — Fear of failure. Think about all those passages in Judges where the hero said, “If…” (Barak, Gideon, Jephthah…) They were afraid of failure.

I think one of the main points of the book is that men need to take the initiative and be leaders. One of the signs of a declining society is lack of male leadership. Men need to have faith in God and they need to live wisely. If they don’t lead, the women will more than likely step in. They will do a good job, but they will not be able to stem the tide of the decline and eventually, society will go downhill so much that they become victims to all kinds of atrocities.

Does this sound anything like our society? I think we are fast approaching a period like we have just read about.

To read more on the subject of why men don’t lead, check out the study on “Why Men Don’t Talk.”

Paving the Way
for Hannah and Samuel

Judges is not a very pretty book. If one made an accurate movie about it, it would have to be “R” rated because of all the violence and sexual perversion. But Judges was placed in the Bible for a purpose. Judges shows just how bad things got in Israel before David came along. Again, we can look at our chart of the OT which shows how Judges fits into Israelite history.

While we’ve been tracing the decline of Israelite society through the role of women, the author of Judges has also begun to weave another theme into the story line that he wants to bring out for his readers. The clue to this new theme is a different phrase which he repeats at the beginning of each section. The phrase is this, “Now there was a (certain) man from …”

This phrase is found in the Bible only twice in Judges, once in Ruth and a couple times in 1st and 2nd Samuel. I think this is a pretty good clue that Samuel wrote Judges and Ruth too.

There were two women that we didn’t deal with in our earlier survey—Samson’s mother and Micah’s mother. They didn’t fit into the earlier scenario, but they do play an important role in the unfolding of the other theme. These ladies serve as foils in the story in preparation for Hannah and her son.

Judges 13:2 says, “and there was a certain man of Zorah…” and his wife was barren and the angel of the Lord appeared to her and said she would have a son whom she would dedicate to the Lord’s service and she had Samson. As we already seen, Samson was a great fighter, but not much of a leader. His life was a tragedy. So Samson’s mother is a foil for Hannah who appears in 1 Samuel.

Judges 17:1 says, “now there was a man of the hill country…” We are introduced to the other mother. Micah’s mother was also a foil for Hannah. When her son admitted that he stole the 1100 shekels of silver from her, she blessed him (when she should have rebuked him). When he returned the money, she consecrated it to the Lord and commissioned her son to have a carved image and a cast idol made from a portion of the silver. This idol ended up being used by the Danites to establish a religious cult at Shiloh (18:30-31). Again, we see that this character’s life led to evil conditions in the land.

Ruth 1:1 says, “Now it came about in the days when the judges governed, that there was a famine in the land. And a certain man of Bethlehem went to Moab…” This is a similar phrase to the ones used in Judges and the author is about to introduce Ruth, the heroine of this story. Again, we have a woman as the prominent character. Ruth stands out like a bright light in the midst of the darkness of the period of the judges. She is a model of faithfulness, loyalty and love—which is God’s ideal. But we see that it is a foreign woman who fulfills the ideal, and not one of God’s own people.

Then we come to 1 Samuel.

1 Sam 1:1 says, “Now there was a certain man from Ramathaim-zophim…”

Here Hannah is introduced. She is barren, like Samson’s mother. She prays to God for a child and makes a vow that she will dedicate her son to God’s service. We see that she promises that a razor shall never come to his head. The introductory phrase, “Now there was a certain man…” should have reminded a reader that this was related to the story of Samson. This vow about long hair should certainly remind us of Samson’s story. God hears her, Samuel is born and she dedicates him to the Lord. God uses Samuel to raise up a king for Israel in 10:17f. If you remember, the final comment in Judges was, “In those days there was no king in Israel; every man did what was right in his own eyes.” God changes that in 1 Samuel. This is another literary clue that the book of Judges is preparing us for King David.

So, it seems clear to me that the same author has written Judges, Ruth and Samuel. In Judges he shows the decline of the nation. In Ruth, he shows that it is a foreign woman who carries on the ideal of God’s loyal love. Then in 1 Samuel, he shows the rise of the nation back to greatness through the leadership of David. The story of David and Goliath should remind one of the earlier judges—Othniel, Ehud and Shamgar. Doesn’t David use an unconventional weapon in battle against the giant, Goliath?

I am amazed at the continuity between the books of Judges, Ruth and 1 Samuel and the skill which the author used to tie them together.

But we shouldn’t just be amazed at the story. Men should be convicted of their responsibility to trust God and lead. And women should be convicted of the futility of stepping in and picking up the slack when men fail to lead.

1 Taken from Chisholm’s handout in Hebrew class.

2 Robert Chisholm, class notes 93.

We live in an anti-intellectual, anti-authority society, especially when it comes to religious matters. Ours is an existential (based on human experience, empirical) society devoted to the ‘warm fuzzy’ feel good, self-centered mentality that is so characteristic of the New Age movement which has bombarded the country—including much of the church. As a consequence, the terms doctrine or theology are not very popular in Christian circles. In fact, they are often denigrated or belittled. We hear statements like, “We don’t need to know all that theological or doctrinal stuff. We just need to know Jesus.” Or, “Well, I am not a theologian and never expect to be. I just love Jesus.” But knowing and loving Jesus in truth is dependent on the teachings of the Bible. Doctrine is simply another name for teaching and theology means “the knowledge of God.” Often the term theology is used in a general way to refer to other areas of study that relate to the knowledge of God. Biblical theology is simply the truths of God’s Word that give us the knowledge of God, of man, salvation, sanctification, the church, or life and life abundantly.

Jesus Himself said, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free” (John 8:32), and when praying His great high-priestly prayer to the Father He said, “Sanctify them through Your truth, Your Word is truth” (John 17:17). Besides being an attitude of ignorance, such a attitude toward doctrine and theology ignores the Bible as God’s inspired and authoritative Word. It treats God’s Word as simply a lot of superfluous and outdated information—stuff we really don’t need. This elevates man’s wisdom above God’s wisdom when the opposite is really the case.

Isaiah 55:6-11 Seek the Lord while He may be found; Call upon Him while He is near. 7 Let the wicked forsake his way, And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the Lord, And He will have compassion on him; And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon. 8 “For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither are your ways My ways,” declares the Lord. 9 “For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts. 10 “For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, And do not return there without watering the earth, And making it bear and sprout, And furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater; 11 So shall My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It shall not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.

There is only one way to experience God’s salvation and sanctification and that is through Jesus Christ and the life God gives us in Him. We can only experience this, however, as we listen to the teachings (doctrines) of the Bible, which is our index for faith and practice.

Satan, through his angels of light (actually angels of darkness), not only denies Christ as the sole answer, but offers many other roads and substitutes to life, but they are all false and lead to destruction.

In Matthew 7:13-14 Jesus said, “Enter through the narrow gate, because the gate is wide and the way is spacious that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. But the gate is narrow and the way is difficult that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

To those who had already entered by faith into relation with Christ (as well as others who were listening; v. 28), our Lord describes the comparative unpopularity of their new position. The order of gate and way suggests the gate as the entrance to the way, symbolic of a believer’s initial experience with Christ, which introduces him to the life of godliness. The first Christians were called those of “the Way” (Acts 9:2; 19:9, 23; 22:4; 24:14, 22). Though the mass of mankind is upon the broad way that leads to destruction (eternal ruin), the other gate and way are so small as to need finding. Yet the same God who provided Christ, who is both gate and way (Jn 14:6), also causes men to find the portal (Jn 6:44). Life. Here a contrasting parallel to destruction and thus a reference to the blessed state in heaven, though this eternal life begins at regeneration.¹

The Lord goes on to warn against the many false teachers who would arise to lead people through the wrong gate and down the path of destruction.

Matthew 7:15-20 “Watch out for false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are voracious wolves. 7:16 You will recognize them by their fruit. People don’t gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles, do they? 7:17 In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. 7:18 A good tree is not able to bear bad fruit, nor a bad tree to bear good fruit. 7:19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 7:20 So then, you will recognize them by their fruit (NET Bible).

In the context, please note the fruit by which these false prophets are known—it is their teaching, not necessarily their behavior. For how do these wolves appear? They appear in sheep’s clothing. In other words, they look like sheep and talk like sheep. They are often kind and even moral. They use religious terminology and act concerned for people and society, but in reality, they are wolves preaching a false way either in relation to salvation or sanctification or both.

Those who enter upon the narrow way must beware of false prophets, who claim to guide believers but really practice deception. Sheep’s clothing is not to be regarded as prophets’ garb, but is an evident contrast to vicious wolves. God’s people in all ages have needed to beware of deceptive leaders (Deut 13:1; Acts 20:29; I Jn 4:1; Rev 13:11-14). By their fruits. The doctrines produced by these false prophets, rather than the works they perform, since outward appearances may not cause suspicion. The test of the prophet is his conformity to Scripture (I Cor 14:37; Deut 13:1-5). Corrupt tree. One that is decayed, worthless, unusable. The worthlessness of such a tree calls for its swift removal from the orchard lest it infect the others.²

As mentioned, we live in an anti-intellectual, existential, emotional, self-centered, and Satan-inspired environment that seeks to bring people into religious experiences. But this environment either denies Christ and the Bible as God’s final Word, or it seeks to subtract from or add to Christ as God’s solution. Christ alone is not enough.

Recently, we heard a prominent daytime talk show host talk about how bad television is becoming and its negative influence on society. In a genuine desire to combat ‘bad’ television, she wants her shows to be a force for transformation, designed to help people turn their lives around. Now this sounds good, right? But it is so deceptive! Unless people know God’s Word even Christians will easily be misled. New Age terms were used such as “center yourself,” “meditate,” “get in touch with your spirit,” “empty yourself,” and invite the great source (or whatever you want to call it) to “come into your heart.” One show was devoted to showing how you can have all the money and success you want simply by thinking positively.

God’s Holy Word teaches us that to combat such false teaching, we need to know and be trained in the Scripture. This is a very strong thrust of the Bible, especially, the New Testament.

Ephesians 4:11-14 It was he who gave some as apostles, some as prophets, some as evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 4:12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, that is, to build up the body of Christ, 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God—a mature person, attaining to the measure of Christ’s full stature. 4:14 The purpose of this is to no longer be children, tossed back and forth by waves and carried about by every wind of teaching by the trickery of people who with craftiness carry out their deceitful schemes (NET Bible, emphasis mine).

Colossians 2:1-5 For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you, and for those in Laodicea, and for as many as have not met me face to face. 2:2 My goal is that their hearts, having been knit together in love, may be encouraged, and that they may have all the riches of full assurance in their understanding of the knowledge of the mystery of God, namely, Christ, 2:3 in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. 2:4 I say this so that no one will deceive you through arguments that sound reasonable. 2:5 For though I am absent from you in body, I am present with you in spirit, rejoicing to see the order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. (emphasis mine)

2 Pet. 2:1-3 But false prophets arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. These false teachers will infiltrate your midst with destructive heresies, even to the point of denying the Master who bought them. As a result, they will bring swift destruction on themselves. 2:2 And many will follow their debauched lifestyles. Because of these false teachers, the way of truth will be slandered. 2:3 And in their greed they will exploit you with deceptive words. Their condemnation pronounced long ago is not sitting idly by; their destruction is not asleep (NET Bible).

So how do we protect ourselves and other believers from this onslaught? And where do we begin so we can also truly experience the grace of God in Christ? In other words, where does this process begin? It should begin with the basics—with a study like the ABCs For Christian Growth, Laying the Foundation. The key terms used in this title (‘ABCs,’ ‘Christian Growth,’ and ‘Foundation’) were carefully chosen because they each express biblical ideas and objectives God has for the Christian. So many Christians today are biblically illiterate. The sad fact is, this is true even in churches that claim to be Bible-centered. Because of this, and as an incentive for the study of the ABCs For Christian Growth series, I believe it is important that we see the emphasis the Bible has on the key terms used in the title for this series of studies.

If you are a new Christian, you may not be aware that very little time today, in contrast to the past, is devoted to indepth Bible study and expository preaching. In times past, solid Bible teaching occurred both Sunday morning and evening as well as on Wednesday night. This was the minimum for most evangelical Bible churches, but that is not the case today. Some churches are seeking to maintain a strong Bible teaching emphasis through small groups, and this has replaced Sunday and Wednesday evenings. But too often these small groups are more fellowship and sharing oriented, than Bible centered. The fellowship, the sharing and caring play an important role, but never to the exclusion of the Word.

Thus, since the terms used in the title of this series are not only biblical, but have a strong focus in the Bible, I believe a brief look at these terms is needed to grasp their significance, their need in the church of today, and the objectives of this series of studies.

The Concept of Growth

One of the clear teachings and objectives of the New Testament for believers is that of spiritual growth. When we are saved, no matter how old we are physically, we are born into the family of God as babes (little children) in Christ (cf. 1 Cor. 3:1f; 1 John 2:13 [children, paidia, babes]). Obviously, one of the fundamental needs of a child is proper nourishment and training to promote healthy growth. Thus, there is the strong emphasis in Scripture on spiritual growth for believers in all stages of maturity (see also 1 Pet. 2:2; 2 Pet. 3:18; Phil. 3:12f). The plain fact is, a failure to grow up spiritually is considered abnormal and deserving of rebuke or censure since growth is also a matter of choice.

Who is responsible for our spiritual growth? The Bible teaches us that a failure to grow is a matter of neglect for which two parties are responsible—the spiritual parents (church leaders and those who lead people to the Lord) and the individual believer himself. The following passages demonstrate this:

(1) Spiritual growth is a prime responsibility for church leaders and other mature believers. The New Testament emphasis in the epistles on teaching and sound doctrine and caring for believers (see verses below) illustrates this along with the very idea of the role and function of elders who are to shepherd the flock (Acts 20:28; Eph. 4:11-16; 1 Thess. 2:1-12; 1 John 2:12f; 1 Tim. 4:6, 11, 13; 1 Pet. 5:1f).

(2) Spiritual growth is also a responsibility for the individual himself. The following verses teach us that God holds us all responsible for our own spiritual growth to some degree. This includes the responsibility to follow the teaching and example of sound and godly leadership (cf. Heb. 13:7, 17; 1 Thess. 5:12f; 1 Cor. 3:1f; Heb. 5:11-6:1f).

The Concept of the ABCs

Since we all begin as babes in Christ, we must begin with the basics, the ABCs of the Word. This idea is solidly brought out in Hebrews 5:11-6:1. The author of Hebrew had advanced truth that he wanted to communicate to his readers about the Lord Jesus, but he knew they could not grasp it because of their spiritual sluggishness and indifference. This sluggishness and indifference had also contributed to the continuation of their spiritual immaturity, the other reason for their inability to go on in growth.

They had evidently been taught the basics (note the word “again” in verse 12), but they had failed, for whatever reason, to properly learn and go beyond what the author calls the “elementary principles” (NASB), “beginning elements” (NET Bible), “elementary truths” (NIV) of the oracles of God or God’s Word. “Elementary principles, truths,” is a translation of the Greek stoiceion, “one of a row, hence a letter (of the alphabet),” and so by extension, “the basics of knowledge, the ABCs of any subject.” Just as in first grade, the ABCs are the building blocks, the foundation on which other knowledge is grasped and related to, so all Christians need to know the basics of the Word if they are going to be able to move on to spiritual maturity and productive Christian lives as those who can also teach others (vs. 12a).

In Hebrews 6:1, the author continues his exhortation. Once the basic principles concerning Christ are grasped, the author wanted these believers to grow toward greater and greater spiritual maturity through steady spiritual growth. They were to continue to discern between living truths of what we have in Christ and lifeless forms, the shadows of the Old Testament such as were found in Judaism in the washings, baptisms, and rituals. Note that in verse 3 the writer identifies himself with his readers and expresses his own need to continue to grow. None of us ever arrive, so to speak. We all need to continue to grow.

In the context of this passage, several ABCs are mentioned (6:1-2). Among these are “repentance from dead works and of faith toward God.” One of the fundamental problems in the church today, as always, is legalism or the problem of dead works—man working in his own steam to be accepted or to gain favor with God, and even to experience his own sense of significance.

People need and desire three basic things, which we can also identify with the letters, ABC: (1) Acceptance (we have been accepted by God by grace through faith in Christ), (2) Belongingness (as regenerated members of the family of God, we belong to God and to one another), and (3) Competence (through God’s enablement, we can do whatever God calls us to do—He gives us the Holy Spirit, our enabler, and spiritual abilities). But man’s bent and Satan’s delusion is to get people to seek these either apart from God’s answer in Christ, or just partially through Christ and partially by adding something (works).

The point is, if our understanding of God’s grace and faith in the work of God for us in Christ (grace) is lacking, we will miss the abundant life that is ours to experience in Christ. Christians must have their lives founded firmly on the truth of faith alone in Christ alone, and this is true not only for salvation from sin’s penalty, but also for sanctification, spiritual change and the experience of the Christ-exchanged life—a work of the Spirit in which we cooperate by faith.

The Concept of the Foundation

No superstructure can be built, spiritually speaking, so that it can withstand the spiritual torrents it will face without a proper foundation. The ABCs form the solid foundation we need. But this is just another of those word pictures used in the New Testament to teach us how vital it is that we lay a sound doctrinal foundation. A couple of passages illustrate this:

Matthew 7:24-27 Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine, and acts upon them, may be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock. 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded upon the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of Mine, and does not act upon them, will be like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and it fell, and great was its fall.

In conclusion to his teaching in this passage, Jesus presented the two options open to His listeners. They were now responsible for what they had heard and must make a choice. Note the element of personal responsibility here—they could build on one of two foundations.

One foundation was likened to a big rock and the other to sand. The point is that a foundation determines a structure’s ability to withstand the storms we all face in life as illustrated by the words rain, floods, and winds. The rock foundation not only represented the Lord Himself but also the truths He had been teaching, especially the truth concerning a righteousness through faith which also produces an inner transformation through spiritual growth.

The sand, by contrast, spoke of pharisaic righteousness, an external and hypocritical righteousness of human works. The people were well acquainted with the so called righteousness of the Pharisees and many were basing their hopes on this kind of righteousness.

In the storms of life (the winds and the torrents of rain) the first foundation, the rock would give stability; the sand would result in destruction or ruin.

Thus, those who hear and heed words of Jesus are wise; those who do not are foolish. Only two courses of action are possible—two kinds of roads and gates (Matt. 7:13-14), two kinds of trees and fruit (vv. 15-20), two kinds of foundations and builders (vv. 24-27).

Once the foundation has been laid, we need to continue to grow and go on to greater maturity. When we fail to do this, we will regress and become hardened in our hearts (cf. 3:7f). Other passages that use the foundation metaphor are 1 Corinthians 3:10-12; Ephesians 2:20. Hebrews 6:1.

The Concept of Sound Doctrine

In keeping with the importance of having a solid foundation are the terms ‘sound’ or ‘healthy’ doctrine. To show our need not only of doctrine, but healthy, accurate teaching, we have another strong emphasis which exhorts us to not only train and bring believers to maturity, but to also guard the great truths of Scripture. The following passages and their sheer number demonstrate just how important sound doctrine is to the purposes and plan of God and to the people of God that they might not be led astray.

2 Tim. 1:13-14 Retain the standard of sound words which you have heard from me, in the faith and love which are in Christ Jesus. 14 Guard, through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us, the treasure which has been entrusted to you.

1 Timothy 6:3 If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness.

2 Timothy 4:3-4 I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: 2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires; 4 and will turn away their ears from the truth, and will turn aside to myths.

Titus 1:9 … holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.

1 Timothy 4:6-7 In pointing out these things to the brethren, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, constantly nourished on the words of the faith and of the sound doctrine which you have been following. 7 But have nothing to do with worldly fables fit only for old women. On the other hand, discipline yourself for the purpose of godliness.

1 Timothy 1:10-11 …and immoral men and homosexuals and kidnappers and liars and perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound teaching, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, with which I have been entrusted.

Paul concluded this inventory of sinners in 1 Timothy 1:10-11 with an all-inclusive reference to any behavior which is contrary to sound doctrine (lit., to “healthy teaching”; cf. 2 Tim. 1:13), including no doubt the very behavior of the false teachers themselves. “Doctrine” here is didaskalia, “teaching” or “the content taught,” used seven times in this epistle (1 Timothy 1:10; 4:1, 6, 13, 16; 5:17; 6:1).

It is through the Bible and its revelation of Jesus Christ that people can know God and experience God’s provision of righteousness for salvation, deliverance from sin’s penalty (Rom. 1-4) and sanctification, deliverance from the power and reign of sin (Rom. 5-8). Thus, in Romans 6:17 Paul wrote, “But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form (tupos, “form, figure, pattern,”)³ of teaching (or doctrine) to which you were committed.” Paul had just declared, “For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace.” Though the Law pointed forward to the coming Messiah as God’s solution for sin, one of the Law’s primary purposes was to show man to be a sinner and in great need of the coming Savior (see 1 Tim. 1:8-10; Rom. 7:7). The point is, the Law could command, but not enable. It did not give justification nor sanctification righteousness. These can only come by knowing and responding in faith to the glorious message of the Gospel of Christ.

Knowing God and experiencing Him in all aspects of life is both factual, involving an intellectual comprehension of the truth, and personal, involving a personal response to that truth by faith. And we cannot bypass this order. Faith is ultimately worthless unless it is based on truth, on that which is able, willing, and available to deliver.

. . . Healthy relationships must be based upon both a factual and a personal knowledge of the one loved. Thus it is with knowing God. A healthy relationship with God must begin with an intellectual knowledge of who He is, which then matures into a deeper personal experience of knowing God in life. God manifests Himself to us on the mountain peaks, in the valleys, in the swamps—in all aspects of our lives.⁴

Knowing God and experiencing Him in the salvation He offers us in Christ is not void of experience and the work of God in the heart or on the emotions, but it never excludes knowing and understanding the truth of Scripture.

1 Everett F. Harrison, The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, New Testament, (Chicago: Moody Press) 1962, electronic media.

2 Harrison, electronic media.

3 “Form of teaching” refers to Christian teaching that is in keeping with the revelation of God in Christ; see also 1 Timothy 1:11.

4 Gary E. Vincelette, Basic Theology Applied, editors, Wesley & Elain Willis, John & Janet Master, Victor Books, Wheaton, 1995, p. 15.

Jesus accused the Pharisees of "straining gnats and swallowing camels" (Matthew 23:23-24). This was our Lord's way of graphically pointing out that the Pharisees had lost sight of what was really important. They would "strain" at very fine points of the truth and yet overlook the most important truths. For example, they would accuse Jesus of a technical violation of the law for healing a sick person on the Sabbath. The disciples of John the Baptist did the same thing. They became so focused on "their" ministry that they began to look upon Jesus as their competition, rather than as the glorious culmination of their ministry (John 3:22-36).

The disciples of our Lord did likewise. They were more interested in Jesus eating a meal than they were in the "harvest" of many souls (John 4:27-42).

Many are the times when a coach has to take his team aside and drill them on the fundamentals, because they are so easily forgotten. It is easy for us to become sidetracked, and to lose sight of what is basic and fundamental, isn't it? This series on "The Fundamentals of the Faith" is an attempt to refocus our attention on the things that are important. I would not say that this study is exhaustive, and that all of the fundamentals have been covered here. Nor would I say that every issue is equally fundamental.

There are some truths which, if denied, would make one a heretic. To deny certain fundamentals would be to deny the faith, delivered once for all to the saints. To deny "the eternal security of the saints" would not keep one from heaven, but it may make one's time on earth less fruitful.

The "Fundamentals of the Faith" are those truths which guide and govern our lives. They are the anchors of our faith. They are the standard by which we measure and weigh all other claims to truth. They are the basis for our priorities. They determine our eternal destiny as they should direct our earthly life. Let us think on these matters very carefully. May God guide us in our study of these most important matters.