The Pioneers’ New Testament

This study is the result of a conversation after church (Thanks, John!), when a brother remarked about people tossing around words like “transfiguration” without ever stopping to wonder what they actually mean. A quick check revealed that the word used by both Matthew and Mark is metamorphoo, whose noun form, transliterated, is recognized by every grade-school science student as “metamorphosis” – what happens when the caterpillar they have carefully fed with leaves, and watched as it spun its cocoon, emerges to their wonder and delight as a beautiful butterfly. It’s still the same critter – but it has been transformed into its intended, mature destiny.
Back at home with my reference books, I was startled to discover that metamorphoo (L/S “to transform, to change”) is used only four times in the entire New Testament: these two references to Jesus on the mountain (Mt.17:2, Mk.9:2), Romans 12:2 speaking of the faithful person’s mind (W.S.#96) being transformed to become capable of understanding and following the Lord’s instructions, and II Cor.3:18, of the process of their/our maturing to reflect the Lord’s own radiance – to be transformed into his very image – God’s original intent (Gen.1:26) at Creation!

How very beautifully that all fits together! Especially in the light added by Luke. Only he, who does not use metamorphoo at all, says anything about the topic of Jesus’ conversation with Moses and Elijah: his “departure” (exodos) – yes, the same word as “Exodus”– that was about to be “completed” (pleroun, from pleroo, to complete or to fulfill). This has been traditionally interpreted as a reference to Jesus’ death: but L/S lists no classical references to death for exodos. Only “going out, or the marching forth of a procession or a military expedition” are mentioned. The word occurs only here, in Heb.11:22 (of the historical exodus), and II Pet.1:15, of which the traditional interpretation is also open to question, due to Peter’s subsequent reference to the same event (vv.16-18) as a revelation of Jesus’ glory. I take this to be another of many signposts in the direction of seeing Jesus as focused upon his ultimate defeat not only of death, but of  all the forces of evil, which is/was his own mature destiny, rather than the traditional notions of “sacrifice” (W.S. #95). He was “departing” for the ultimate “expedition” – and conquered gloriously!

Of course, once you start tracking a word, one thing invariably leads to another. The English word “transform” also represents another Greek word, metaschematizo, used only five times, which, besides describing a change in a person or thing (L/S), as in Phil.3:21 – “He (Jesus) will transform our body to be like his”, also refers both to disguise and deception (ICor.11:13,14,15), and (I Cor.4:6) to a simple analogous illustration.

“Change”, also, can be for the better or worse. This adds five more Greek words to be considered, most of which seem to be nearly interchangeable, and none of which really dominate. For example, the statements in Hebrews of the necessity of “change” in the priesthood and the law incorporates (Heb.7:12) both metatithemi and metathesis, as does the enigmatic statement (Heb.4:5 and 12:27) of Enoch’s disappearance (traditionally rendered “translated,” which in modern usage refers only to language.)
The complaint about Stephen for “changing the customs Moses established” (Ac.6:14), and the “changing like a garment” of heaven and earth (Heb.1:12), both employ allatto, connected to the adjective allos “other”, which is used of Paul’s wish to “change his voice” (Gal.4:20), and the glorious “change” of the faithful to their resurrection bodies (I Cor.15:51), but also, both separately and in its prefixed form metallatto, of the perversity of those who have rejected the general revelation of God, and “exchanged” it for the worship of idols (Rom.1:23,25,26).
Jude (v.4) uses metatithemi for that “exchange”, and Paul (Gal.1:6) uses it to reprimand the departure of some people from faithfulness.
A change of location or jurisdiction is expressed by both metatithemi (Ac.7:16) and methistemi (Col.1:13, I Cor.13:2), which latter also applied simply to the loss of a job (Lk.16:4, Ac.13:22).
It is probably significant that metaballo, easily the most ambiguous term, is used only once (Ac.28:6), of the people of Melita “changing their minds” about Paul after he was unharmed by the snakebite.

The changes/transformations advocated in the New Testament go far beyond merely abstractly “changing one’s mind” or opinion. This is explored in more detail in W.S.#6, dealing with the call to metanoeo (noeo is the verb form of nous #96). Lexically, metanoeo, metanoia, is also a change of mind – but it is one that involves, like most of the “mind” references in the previous post, the entire re-orientation of one’s life.

One key to that transformation lies in another phrase that appears in several of the references – Rom.12:2, Eph.4:23, Col.3:10: “the renewal of your/our minds” or “understanding”. In Titus 3:5, “renewal” is paired with “regeneration”.  Both the Ephesians and Colossians passages call for the “putting off” of one’s former life, in favor of the new – and very different – life in Christ. The mixed tenses of the imperatives and participles imply both decisive, punctiliar action (aorist), and continuous (present) effort.
“Renewal” represents four Greek words, three of which, anakainoo (II Cor.4:16, Col.3:!0), anakainosis (Rom.12:2, Tit.3:5), and anakainizo (Heb.6:6), are related, and one, ananeomai (Eph.4:23) is used only once. L/S records no other meanings for any of these. They are quite parallel to the ideas in II Cor.5:17 referring to a “new creation” and Eph.2:15 and 4:24 to a “new man [person]”.

You may have noticed that all of these references refer to a major alteration in the nature, life, and behavior of individuals or groups – all, that is, except the two instances that initiated this investigation: the use of metamorphoo in the three disciples’ experience with Jesus. Did Jesus himself somehow “change,” there on the mountain? He needed no “transformation” to become what God intended, although Heb.2:10, 5:9,7:28 do speak of his “maturing” (W.S.#13).
I think the key to the discrepancy here may be in Jesus’ charge to his awe-struck companions (Mt.17:9), “Don’t tell anyone the vision (horama)” until after the resurrection. Horama is used 11 times in the New Testament, all but this one in Acts (9:10, 9:12, 10:3, 10:17, 11:5, 12:9, 16:9, 16:10, 18:9) – and all are referring to a supernatural experience imparting information or instructions not available in any other way. I think Peter must have understood it this way, from his comment in II Pet.1:16-18. He asserts that they were privileged to be “eyewitnesses of his magnificence [glory]”. Jesus did not change. His true identity was supernaturally revealed to them (emprothen auton). And this revelation, whether by vision or some other means, is the beginning of the transformation of all who choose to follow him.

“And we all, with faces that have been uncovered, reflecting the Lord’s own radiance, are being transformed [metamorphosed!] into his image, from glory to glory, according to the pattern of the Lord’s spirit”(II Cor.3:18).   Every verb form is in the present tense. It is continuously happening, from the beginning of one’s “turning to the Lord” (v.16).

May we continually delight in – and cooperate with! – that metamorphosis!

Thanks be to God!

When I saw “What does the New Testament say about the mind?” on the search list, my first thought was “Not much!” Bad response! “Mind” has been used to represent seven different Greek words in the New Testament. None of them are particularly common. Their classical usage is similar, but not synonymous. Sorting them is challenging.  Three of these words can be rather quickly laid aside, because of their rarity.

Phronema, “thought, purpose, aspiration,” or, in a negative sense, “presumption, arrogance” (L/S), appears only in Rom.8:7 and 8:27, referring, in both cases, to the focus of attention, whether on the human nature or on the Spirit.
Ennoia, “thinking, reflection, cogitation”, or “a notion, concept, or idea” (L/S), a common word in the Greek philosophers, likewise appears only twice: I Pet.4:1 and Heb.4:12, both of which tend toward the sense of a deliberately determined attitude by which one’s life is consciously ordered.
Psuche, more commonly translated “life” or “soul”, is rendered three times “mind”: Ac.14:2, Phil.1:27, Heb.12:3. For a more thorough treatment of this word, please refer to W.S.#28.

This leaves us with four words, which may be a little easier to distinguish, since they appear in more contexts.
Noema, “perception, thought, purpose, idea, concept, understanding, mind” (L/S), used six times, occurs only in Paul’s writings. In II Cor.3:14, 4:4, and 11:3, the reference is to the blinding of the “understanding” of those who have refused the guidance of the Holy Spirit; II Cor.2:11 is more specific about where that blockage comes from (the traditional translation there is “devices.” The only positive references are Phil.4:7, promising the protection of their/our minds by the peace of God, and II Cor.10:5, a reminder of the faithful disciple’s responsibility (a present active participle), to “subjugate every mind [thought] into the obedience of Christ (like his)”. In both positive and negative contexts, noema seems to be quite definitely subject to an individual’s conscious decision.

Gnome, “intelligence, means of knowing, thought, judgment, opinion, verdict, intention, consent” (L/S), occurs eight times. This is the word used when Paul states that he has no “word from the Lord” on a matter, but offers his opinion (I Cor.7:25, 7:40; II Cor.8:10), or defers a decision about Onesimus’ future to Philemon’s approval (Phm.4). In Rev.17:13 and 17, the ungodly have also made a deliberate decision to join the enemies of God. Paul’s decision regarding his itinerary (Ac.20:3), and his admonition (I Cor.1:10) to the Corinthian brotherhood to settle their differences, also represent thoughtful determination.

Dianoia, “thought, intention, purpose; notion, idea, intelligence, understanding, intellectual capacity” (L/S), is used thirteen times: once (traditionally) translated “imagination” (Lk.1:51), three times “understanding” (Eph.1:18, 4:18, I Jn.5:20), and nine times “mind”.
The associated words in the parallel passages quoting the admonition to “love God” are interesting. In traditional translations, Mt.22:37 includes only “heart” (kardia), “soul” (psuche), and “mind” (dianoia). Mk.12:30 says “heart, soul, mind, and strength (ischus),” and Lk.10:27 uses “heart, soul, strength and mind”. For treatment of psuche see W.S.#28, and for ischus see W.S.#31. The passage they all are quoting, Dt.6:5, in the LXX uses only dianoia, psuche, and dunamis, completely omitting any word for “heart”. The traditional OT translation says “heart, soul, and might”. The OT text includes one of the Hebrew words for “heart”, and makes no mention of “mind”! This would be an interesting topic for textual scholars to investigate. However, the presence of dianoia in all three synoptics, probably as a LXX quote, would certainly indicate that (1) the mind is definitely expected to be fully involved in one’s love of God, and (2) it is an entity completely separate from any of the others mentioned.
Paul’s reference to one’s dianoia in Eph.2:3, 4:18, and Col.1:21, as well as the Lk.1;51 passage, make it abundantly clear that the unredeemed “mind” can be disposed to lead one to opposition to the Kingdom; but the prophecies quoted in Heb.8:10 and 10:16, as well as Peter (I Pet.1:13, II Pet.3:1), Paul (Eph.1:18), and John (I Jn.5:20), are equally emphatic that the mind/understanding can and must be enlightened, transformed, and reminded to be consciously pointed in the right direction.

Nous, the most common of the words, appearing 24 times – 17 as “mind” and 7 as “understanding”–shows even more vividly that while the mind certainly controls a person’s attitudes, thoughts, and behavior, it is also itself controlled by his deliberate decision. L/S lists “the mind, in the sense of being employed in thinking, perception, feeling, or deciding; to have one’s mind directed toward something; resolve or purpose; reason or intellect;” or even (Anaxagoras) “the active principle of the universe”! Like dianoia, nous can be either a positive or negative force, as Paul laments in Rom.7:23-35.
This is the only word used of “the mind of the Lord” (Rom.11:34, I Cor.2:16) or “the mind of Christ” (also I Cor.2:16), except for a single occurrence of phronema in Rom.8:27.
Paul warns of the danger of “corrupt minds” (I Tim.6:5, II Tim.3:8), or their being “defiled” (Tit.1:15), “reprobate” (Rom.1:28), characterized by “vanity” (Eph.4:17), “shaken” (II Thes.2:2), or having inflated ideas of one’s own importance (Col.2:18); but he also holds out the option of choosing to have one’s life “transformed (see next post) by the renewing of your mind” (Rom.12:2), and to be “renewed in the spirit of your mind” (Eph.4:23), until “we have the mind of Christ” (I Cor.2:16)! He urges the Corinthian church, threatened by factions, to be “joined together in the same mind” (I Cor.1:10).
After his resurrection, Jesus graciously “opened the minds [understanding]” of his mourning disciples, “to understand the Scriptures”, and to realize that he was really alive and in their midst (Lk.24:45). Only then did things begin to make sense to them. It requires “a mind that has wisdom” (Rev.17:9) or a person “that has understanding” (Rev.13:18) to discern the Lord’s hand – and that does not start only at the end of history!
But there are times when even a wise and devoted mind is not enough. Paul goes to great length to explain (I Cor.14:14-19) that while worship, the singing of praises, and prayer may at times need to go beyond the reach of one’s mind/understanding, that does not obviate the need for the mind’s involvement. Expressions both with and beyond the understanding are intended to be supplementary, and not mutually exclusive.

Close attention to many of these references reveals, however, that faithfulness is not a “mind trip”! The mind/understanding, while necessary and helpful, is not an end in itself.
Probably the best summary may be found in Rom.12:2: “Be (continuously) completely changed, by the renewal of your mind (nous), so that you all will recognize what God’s will is” – whereupon Paul spends the next couple chapters describing the practical outcome of that transformation.
When, using a third person imperative of phroneo, Paul writes to the Philippians that they must adopt and internalize the “mind” of the Lord Jesus (Phil.2:5), it is in the midst of admonitions to faithful living.
Committing worries and concerns to the Lord, (Phil.4:7), he concludes, “God’s peace, which greatly exceeds all understanding (nous), will protect your hearts and minds (noema) in Christ Jesus!”

May this confidence spur our hearts and minds to determined faithfulness!

For the purpose of this study, a supplement to #94, although the Elizabethan English word “suffer” was also used as a synonym for “allow” (aphiemi, didomi, eao, epitrepo) and “endure” (anechomai), these will not be considered here. We will confine ourselves to the references where “suffer” is used to translate pascho, pathema. These words probably include the broadest range, scripturally, of any of the four words mentioned in the previous post: but even so, the New Testament writers do not apply it to mere annoyance or inconvenience, as so many folks are prone to do today.

Classically, the word includes the plight of a victim of any kind of oppression, the experience of any misfortune, the payment of a legal penalty, any abuse or ill-treatment, but also of well-being, or the receiving of benefits! (L/S). Thayer indicates that it can be used of any sensate experience, but usually one of evil, illness, or bad fortune. Medically (L/S), it was used of symptoms or troubles.
Similar diversity is also seen in the New Testament. Pascho is used in the complaint of Pilate’s wife about her dream (Mt.27:19), the plight of the woman who could not be helped by doctors (Mk.5:26), the group of Jews abused by Pilate (Lk.13:2), the mutual dependence of the human body (I Cor.12:26), and the punishment deserved by a person convicted of a crime (I Pet.4:15).

However, the majority of the 39 New Testament appearances of the verb form and 14 of the noun refer specifically to the sufferings of either Jesus (24x), or his people (25x), as a direct result of their faithfulness. Jesus spoke repeatedly of his anticipated suffering of rejection by the elders and priests of the Jewish hierarchy (Mt.16:21, 17:12; Mk.8:31, 9:12; Lk.9:22, 17:25), as well as the specific event of his death (Lk.22:15, 24:26). Notice that Jesus himself, in contrast to popular emphases, spoke more frequently of “suffering” in connection with his being rejected by those who should have welcomed him, than he did of his actual death. It is important to note that fully half of these, in both categories, end with the declaration of the equal certainty of his resurrection.
Repeatedly, that is the key: for the Lord Jesus himself, and for his people, whatever their circumstances. His resurrection, and by extension, theirs/ours, is the power that enables endurance. Paul clearly understood this (Rom.8-18), as did Peter (I Pet.4:13).

In fact, if you will check all of Paul’s uses of pascho and pathema – I Cor.12:26, II Cor.1:5-7, Gal.34, Phil.1:29, 3:10; Col.1:24, I Thes.2:14, II Thes.1:12, II Tim.1:12, 3:11 – you will see that they all refer either to his own (Paul’s) mistreatment, or that of his readers. Only in Phil.3:10 does he connect it to the sufferings of Jesus. Neither Jesus nor Paul, on any occasion, makes any connection of these words with “forgiveness” (W.S. #7) as has been widely taught as “doctrine”. Look it up, folks. It’s not there, and neither is any hint that “suffering” was ever “sent” or “caused” by God! (see “trials”, W.S.#11)

In Ac.9:16, Ananias is told by Jesus that Paul will need to suffer many things “on behalf of my name”, which Paul then passes on in Phil.1:29 “for his sake”; and in II Thes.1:5, he refers to that beleaguered group’s suffering “on behalf of the Kingdom of God”. In each case, the preposition is huper, “on behalf of.” As we saw in W.S. #94 regarding persecution and tribulation, suffering also is viewed simply as one of the consequences to be expected, as a part of identification with Jesus and his Kingdom. (See also W.S.#34, the cross.)

The writer to the Hebrews, in illustrating the shortcomings of the old, obsolete system, is the only one to propose a reason for the suffering of the Lord Jesus: Heb.2:9-10 – so that his death and subsequent glory would destroy (14-15) the power of death over his people, and to make him mature (teleios) for that assignment; Heb.5:8 – it was the way he “learned obedience” (for the same purpose); and Heb.9:26 – to definitively abolish (the word is athetesis, used of the nullification of a contract or treaty) the “failures” [“sins”] of his people. This latter passage is the only place in the entire New Testament where that connection is made. So how did it become the only thing so many people include in their distorted version of “gospel teaching”? Because a good guilt-trip makes it so easy to manipulate people?
Later, the same writer describes the early sufferings of his readers (10:32, 34) – the latter containing the same word with the “together” prefix – as encouragement for their continued faithfulness. “Don’t give up now!” See vv.32-38.

Peter’s first letter, written to refugees scattered across Asia Minor by severe violence against the brotherhood, is almost entirely devoted to encouraging their faithfulness under duress. Again, resurrection hope predominates. Whether Jesus’ sufferings (1:11, 4:1, 4:13, 5:1) or theirs (2:19-23, 3:14-18, 4:13-19, 5:9-10), it is faithful behavior in spite of suffering which promises participation in the Kingdom – both present and future. Twice (3:17-18 and 4:13-19) he reminds them “just make sure that your suffering is not deserved” for some less noble reason! Please see W.S. #12 for a discussion of the references to “God’s will.”

“Sacrifice”(thuo, thusia), on the other hand, as it is used in the New Testament, is always performed at a person’s own initiative. Classically, the only use of either word was the slaughter of animals for food, or burnt as offerings to the gods, or referring to the festivities surrounding those ceremonies. Bauer adds that later, the Rom.12:1 reference was interpreted as an advocacy of martyrdom, but there is no evidence that such was the original intent.
Sixteen times in the New Testament, the word refers to pagan sacrifices to idols. Paul deals with the dilemma this causes in I Cor.8. Nineteen times, the reference is to the sacrifices prescribed in the Old Testament Law – most of them emphasizing its futility (Heb.5:1, 7:27, 8:3, 9:9, 10:1, 5, 8;11) – or to Jesus’ statements that sacrifice is not what God wanted (Mt.9:13, 12:7, Mk.12:33, Ac.7:42). In Lk.15:23,27, 30; Jn.10:10, 10:13, thuo is used simply of slaughtering an animal for food. In Mt.22:4, Mk.14:12, Lk.22:7, the reference is to the killing of the passover lamb, which only once is connected to Jesus (I Cor.5:7). Remember, in that context, that the Passover was a celebration of deliverance from slavery, and had nothing to do with “sin.” That connection is only made in Heb.9:26 and 10:12 where the focus is on the impotence and futility of the old sacrificial system. Interestingly, Jesus never used the word of himself or of anything he did, although Paul does once (Eph.5:2).

“Sacrifice” on the part of God’s people is used in a positive sense in the New Testament only five times, but these are significant. Remember, of all these concepts, sacrifice is the only voluntary one. All imply deliberate action. In Rom.12:1, Paul urges, “present your bodies as a living sacrifice to God”, not killing, but living in worship and obedience to him. In Phil.2:17, Paul speaks of the “sacrifice” of their worship, and doesn’t mind at all if it costs his own life. In Phil 4:18, he refers to the gift of support that the Philippian church had sent to him in prison as “an acceptable sacrifice, pleasing to God”. Heb.13:15-16 advocates a “sacrifice of praise” in worship and thanksgiving, with the assurance that this, like “doing good and sharing”, is pleasing to God.

In the New Testament concept of “sacrifice”, there is no hint of the popular notion of “giving up” some pet vice or pleasure in order to curry favor before God. The “sacrifice” pleasing to God is simply the willing offering of oneself – to be used as he sees fit – for his Kingdom and for his world –
“a living offering, set-apart, pleasing to God. This is your logical [reasonable] worship!” (Rom.12:1)

Let’s be reasonable, folks!

In both of the previous two studies, the concept of “giving thanks” and/or “rejoicing” occasionally referred to persecution, tribulation, suffering, or, as some want to call it, “sacrifice”, on behalf of Jesus and his Kingdom.
None of these four words appear frequently in the New Testament, but their prevalence in “accepted Christian teaching” requires an examination of what really is said in Scripture regarding these subjects.
Contrary to popular assumptions, not one of them is ever presented as having been instigated, caused, or commanded by God, in the New Testament.

Since they represent somewhat different concepts, we will deal with these words in two separate posts. “Persecution” and “tribulation” are used together four times (Mt.13:21, Mk.4:17, Rom.8:35, II Thes.1:4), almost as synonyms, and often assumed to be a normal consequence of faithful living. Persecution and tribulation are not a matter of choice. Both are externally imposed. The only choice is how one will respond.
Jesus described persecution / tribulation as one reason for the falling away of many who had initially been enthusiastic about the Kingdom (Mt.13:21, Mk.4:17), and Paul reminded the converts in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch that the violent opposition they were experiencing was “only normal” (Ac.14:22).

Classically, dioko had more frequently referred to a chase, as in a war or a hunt, or the eager pursuit of an object, person, or goal. This latter is seen also in Rom. 14:19, I Cor.14:1, Phil.3:12,14; I Thes.5:15, II Tim.2:22, Heb.12:14, I Pet.3:11.
It is also used of haste, of the wind driving a ship (Homer), or avid pursuit of an argument (Plato), as well as “to drive away” (Herodotus). Not until the New Testament did the idea of pursuit or legal prosecution acquire the flavor of being abused, driven away, or attacked because of one’s faith commitment, but after that, it appears to be the dominant idea.

Jesus gave careful instructions regarding the response of his disciples to persecution: from “rejoicing” in the confidence of the confirmation of their Kingdom citizenship (Mt.5:10-12, echoed by Paul in Rom.12:14 and I Cor.4:12), to prayer and kindness toward the perpetrators (Mt.5:44), and prudent advice that when it gets too hot in one town (Mt.10:23), it’s time to move! He matter-of-factly warned that persecution would come (Lk.21:12, Mt.23:34), explaining that disciples could expect the same treatment that he himself was encountering (Jn.15:20).

Paul, interestingly, speaks more of his own past record of “persecuting the church” (Ac.22:4, 26:11;  ICor.15:9, Gal.1:13,23; Phil.3:6) than he does of the persecution he personally endured (Gal..5:11, 6:12; II Cor.12:10, II Tim.3:11). And please remember: this “persecution” was not merely social exclusion, financial hardship, or being “talked-about”. Beatings and stonings, prison and death were harsh realities, and not uncommon.
We should not neglect II Tim.3:12, which has often been mis-used, leading some to try to provoke opposition, under the banner of “Everyone that wants to live in a godly manner in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.” Such people need to be reminded of Peter’s warnings regarding “suffering”, which will be treated in the next post (I Pet.2:19-23, 3:14-18, and 4:15).

Thlipsis, classically “pressure, oppression, affliction” (L/S), “distress brought on by outside circumstances” (Bauer), seems to focus more on the affected person, than on the particular circumstances of the persecution. Only five times does it clearly refer to anything but the price of faithfulness: Jesus used it (Jn.16:21) of a woman’s labor in childbirth, James referred to the desperate condition of widows and orphans (1:27), Paul, of final retribution for the unfaithful (Rom.2:9, II Thes.1:6) and the Corinthians’ complaint (II Cor.8:13) of being “burdened” by the expectation of a relief contribution. Elsewhere, 39 times, the reference is to being hassled – sometimes more, sometimes less severely – as a direct result of faithfulness to Jesus’ Kingdom. The one probable exception is the description of political turmoil in Mt.24 and Mk.13 (similar account in Lk.21). A careful reading of these passages reveals that here it is the earlier classical understanding of thlipsis that is intended, as whole nations and kingdoms are disrupted (Mt.24:6-8 and Mk.13:7-8), providing a context for more specific attacks upon the faithful, and a fertile field for perpetrators of deception. (Remember, when you hear predictions by self-styled “world-enders” in times of political unrest, that Jesus himself warned against that very thing in Mt.24:23-27 and Mk.13:21-23).
Please note also that in no case does thlipsis, translated 17x “affliction” and 21x “tribulation”, refer to a single, historical or future event, but consistently to the conditions under which the faithful need to enter the Kingdom (Ac.14:22), to receive the Word (I Thes.1:6), to support one another (Phil.4:14) with joyful generosity (II Cor.8:2), to endure patiently (Rom.12:12), and to encourage one another’s faithfulness (II Thes.1:4).

Jesus put it very realistically (Jn.16:33): “In the world, you have (present tense, not future) hassles (KJV – tribulations). But take courage! I have conquered (perfect tense!) the world!” Notice that this statement occurs even before either his death or his resurrection!
This is why Paul could write (Rom.5:2,3) “We revel in the hope [confidence] of the glory of God! Not only this, but we even appreciate our hassles [tribulations], knowing that hassles produce endurance …”
Read, and soak up, his confident description in II Cor.1:4-7, of both the comfort and the responsibility conferred by the Lord’s presence in the midst of those hassles. Later in the same letter (4:17), amid stress that would probably have crushed most of us, he can declare, “Our temporary, insignificant hassles are producing for us a fantastically overwhelming, eternal amount of glory!” and in 7:4, “I’m overflowing with joy, in spite of all our hassles!”

Please notice here: in no case does Paul attribute the “hassles / tribulations / afflictions” to “God’s will” (see W.S.#12), or to God’s causative action!
The Lord knows (Rev.2:9) and limits (v.10) them, and “coaches” us through them (II Cor.1:4), refusing to allow them to separate us from his love and care (Rom.8:35). He does not deliberately hassle his own!

Thanks be to God!

Although seldom used today in ordinary conversation, the concept of “rejoicing” is pervasive in the New Testament writings. Traditional translators have used the same English word for four different “word families”, varying primarily in their intensity, except for one, which does not seem to fit with the others at all.

Agalliao, with its noun form agalliasis, appears a total of sixteen times, frequently translated with the modifiers “exceeding” or “exceedingly.” This is in harmony with the classical definition, “to rejoice exceedingly, to glorify, or to exult.” In the LXX, it was often used in connection with a celebration at the inaugural anointing of a king, and in other classical writings, of paying honor to a god.
In the New Testament, it speaks of the joy of those who have become faithful (Ac.2:46, 16:34), and it is usually connected with a recognition of the hand of God at work (Lk.1:44, 1:47, 10:21; Jn.5:35, 8:56; Ac.2:26, Heb.1:9), as well as anticipation of his activity (I Pet.1:6, 8; 4:3; Jude 24, Rev.19:7).

The fifteen total uses of euphraino, and the noun euphrosune, on the other hand, while occasionally connected to God (Ac.2:28 and 14:7; Rom.15:10, Gal.4:27), are usually used on a more mundane level. Classically, these referred to any sort of “festivities, mirth, or merriment”, often including luxurious feasting. This is clearly the situation in two major New Testament accounts, both parables, where it is used of the “rich fool” (Lk.12:19) selfishly planning to celebrate his plenty, and the feasting (and subsequent complaints) at the return of the “prodigal son” (Lk. 15:23,29, 32). It also appears describing the partying (Rev.11:10) of the people committed to their “dwelling on earth”, after the killing of God’s faithful witnesses.

Interestingly, it is also the response advocated, for the faithful, to the fall of Babylon (Rev.18:20)!

The anomaly of the group (7x “boast”, 4x “rejoice”, 22x “glory”) is kauchaomai, with kauchema and kauchesis. In the classical writings, these words virtually always have negative connotations, referring to loud, boisterous boasting or bragging, and in the noun form, to pride or superiority. I would be curious to ask Paul why he used it as he did, unless it was simply to contrast his attitude with that of the more common idea. The negative flavor does appear in the New Testament (Jas.4:16, Rom.2:17,23, and 3:27, I Cor.15:31), but it is not dominant. Paul makes heavy use of these terms in II Corinthians: to leverage the response of the group to relief efforts (7:4,14; 9:2), (“Don’t make me sorry I had bragged about your generosity”); to encourage their obedience to his teaching (10:8,13,15); and (12:1) to illustrate the emptiness of bragging abut one’s “spiritual experiences”. Occasionally, he uses it of satisfaction at having faithfully executed one’s responsibility (II Cor.1:12, 11:16; I Thes.2:19, Gal.6:4, Phil.2:16), but also to remind his readers that it is inappropriate (Eph.2:9) to claim personal credit for what the Lord has done.
Nevertheless, Rom.5:2, Phil.1:26, 3:3; Heb.3:6, and Jas.1:9 suggest that kauchaomai is not always out-of-line, which makes one wonder at the translators’ (and the writers’) choice of words. Similar questions arise where kauchaomai is translated “glory” (see W.S.#74).

By far the most frequently used word is chairo (“rejoice”42x, “be glad”14x, “joy” – as a verb – 5x, and 12x as a greeting or farewell.) Its noun form is chara, “joy”, 53x. Chairo may represent a sort of median between the exuberance of agalliao and the more ordinary enjoyment of euphraino. L/S lists “to take pleasure in, to express joy, laughter, to be glad to hear something, or to delight in doing something.” Bauer adds that a hoti clause may give the reason for the rejoicing, and a participle may describe what one is delighted by. He points out that a prepositional phrase with en, as noted in the previous post, is circumstantial, and not causal. In the imperative or vocative forms, chairo serves as a greeting or farewell.

Chairo and agalliao appear together in Mt.5:12, Lk.1:14, I Pet.4:13, Rev.19:7, intensifying the thought.
Chairo and euphraino are joined in Ac.2:26 and Rev.11:10, leaning toward celebration.
Actually, the term represents quite a spectrum of responses. It can refer to casual curiosity (Lk.23:3) or even connivance in wrongdoing (Lk.22:5, Mk.14:11). Positive uses range from the simple pleasure of meeting brethren, or receiving good news (Mt.18:3, Lk.13:7, 15:5; Ac.13:48, Rom.12:15, I Cor.7:30, 13:6, 16:7; II Cor.7:7,9,16; Phil.2:28, II Jn.4, III Jn.3), to grateful recognition of the grace of God (Jn.8:56, 14:28, 16:20,22; 20:20; Ac.11:23, Rom.16:19, I Pet.4:13).

Chairo is the only one of the four words that consistently applies specifically to life “in the Lord”, and requires seeing beyond immediate, often unfavorable circumstances.
Mt.5:12 and Lk.6:23 record Jesus’ words regarding the faithful (or “blessed” – W.S.#89) response to persecution. Notice that in each case, he specifies that the abuse is “for the sake of – heneka – the Son of Man” (Lk.) and “for my sake” (heneken emou) (Mt.). Clearly, this must have been a necessary caveat, since Peter (I Pet.4:13-15) later also found it prudent to add a blunt warning that readers be sure that the “persecution” was for faithfulness, and not deserved, for some less noble reason!
Jesus also offered another guideline for his disciples’ rejoicing – it should not be because of the powers granted to them for ministry, but simply because of their inclusion in the Kingdom and its work! A similar theme occurs in Jn.4:36, and Paul picks up the same idea in Phil.1:18 and Col.1:24-25, where he identifies the price paid for Kingdom service as contributing to the Lord’s own efforts, a statement similar to Peter’s noted above.

The faithfulness of fellow disciples (Col.2:8, I Thes.3:4), even when it involves personal cost (Phil.2:17-18), is a cause for celebration. A generally celebratory, joyful demeanor comes with the territory of becoming truly united in one Body (I Cor.12:26), in concern for one another. Concern for the welfare of the faithful is probably also the motive behind Jesus’ saying that he was “glad” he was not there when Lazarus died (Jn.11:15), so that his followers could be fully convinced of his power / identity. Paul’s statement regarding his own weakness in II Cor.13:9 is similar.

“As for the rest, my brothers – be constantly rejoicing in the Lord!” (Phil.3:1)
“Keep on rejoicing in the Lord! Again, I’ll say, keep on rejoicing!” (Phil.4:4)
“Always keep rejoicing!” (I Thes.5:6)
“Continue to love him, whom you have not seen, being faithful toward him … and celebrating with indescribable and glorious joy!” (I Pet.1:8)

You may be surprised – I certainly was! – to discover that Biblically, eucharisteo, “giving thanks”, is strictly a New Testament word! It does not occur in the LXX at all, although the idea is frequently present, and occasionally translated “thanks”, in eulogeo, “bless” (W.S. #89), aineo, “praise” (W.S. #90), and exomologeo, “confess” (W.S. #68), which are also included in references to “prayer” (W.S.#91) and “worship” (W.S.#50);but this primary word for “giving thanks” is nowhere to be found.

In the New Testament, “thanks” is also sometimes used to translate charis (7x, as opposed to 129x “grace”), and homologeo(1x out of 21x), exomologeomai, (2x out of 11x), and anthomologeomai (only a single appearance), which are all related to “confession” in the sense of “acknowledgment” (W.S.#68). Since most of these deviations fit equally well into the discussions of their primary translations, we will confine this study to eucharisteo (verb), eucharistia (noun), and eucharistos (adj.).

Classically, all of these referred to any expression of gratitude – by anyone, to anyone, for anything – or to an agreeable, grateful nature or personality trait. Occasionally, it was also used of the bestowing of a favor, as well as the obligation thereby incurred. The word is not rare in classical literature, which makes one wonder about its absence from the LXX, in view of its frequency in the New Testament. Could that be an artifact of the greater intimacy of the relationship between God and his people, introduced by Jesus’ own example, made possible to his people by his life, death, and resurrection, and symbolized by the destruction of the temple veil? (See Citizens of the Kingdom, chapter 8).

In all but two New Testament instances, the “thanks” are addressed to God: and these two, while not exemplary, offer significant insight. The first is in Jesus’ parable of the Pharisee and the publican (Lk.18:11). Notice that although ostensibly (and ostentatiously!) “praying”, the Pharisee’s focus is pros heauton – “toward himself”! – as he “thanks God” for his self-perceived superiority. Jesus does not compliment that!
The other is when the eloquent lawyer, Tertullus, attempts to ingratiate himself to Governor Felix, when presenting the Jewish hierarchy’s case against Paul (Ac.24:3). In all the rest of both examples and admonitions, the giving of thanks is addressed to God – but not as persuasive flattery for a corrupt governor! “Thanks” with such an ulterior motive should be understood as insulting to God!

There are three scenes where Jesus himself is represented as giving thanks: before distributing food to the crowds (Mt.15:36, Mk.8:16, Jn.6:11,23); as he broke the bread at the Last Supper (Mt.26:27, Mk.14:23, Lk.22:7,19; and quoted by Paul in I Cor.11:24); and at Lazarus’ tomb (Jn.11:41). Only in this last instance does he specify the object of his thanksgiving, and his statement is instructive: “Father, I thank you that you listened to me. I knew that you are always listening to me, but I said that because of the crowd standing around …” The giving of thanks can be a powerful teaching tool, as it also was for Paul (Ac.27:35) during the shipwreck.

In his letters, Paul gives thanks to God for the faithfulness of individuals or groups (Phil.1:3, Col.1:3, Phm.4, I Thes.3:9), for the brethren who came to meet him on the way to Rome (Ac.28:15), for the generosity of the relief offering (II Cor.9:11), for the gift of praying in tongues (I Cor.14:16), and even that he had not baptized many in Corinth (I Cor.1:14), which he mentions to defuse the factionalism there.

The object of the giving of thanks is clarified by the use of the prepositions, and the sentence structure, with which it is accompanied. Both of the common prepositions, peri and huper, are used with genitive case objects. The case of its object affects the meaning of any preposition. Peri, “about, or for”, indicates motive, care, or “with regard to”. Paul often writes that he is giving thanks “peri humon” – “about you all”, (his readers), and/or their faithfulness (Rom.1:8. I Cor.1:4, Col.1:3, I Thes.1:2, 3:9; II Thes.1:3).
Huper, on the other hand, indicates “for the sake of, on behalf of, as a representative of.” Here it sometimes seems to include more of our concept of prayer, as it is connected with food (I Cor.10:30), and Paul’s anticipated release from prison (II Cor.1:11), as well as the more general huper humin – “on your behalf” (Eph.1:16), and specific gratitude for the help of Priscilla and Aquila (Rom.16:4). Paul urges Timothy that both “prayers (deesis, proseuchais, enteuxis)” and “thanksgiving (eucharistias)” be made huper “on behalf of all people” – including “rulers and others in authority” – who probably are not doing anything of the kind on their own! (I Tim.2:1).

Distinguishing between prepositions and their objects would avoid many major misunderstandings. Some of the common rhetoric about “giving thanks for everything” is a case in point.
In Eph.5:20, “giving thanks huper panton” is a part of Paul’s description of mutual teaching and celebration in the brotherhood, with everyone contributing! (5:15-20). Since panton, the genitive plural of pas (“all”), is identical in its masculine, feminine, and neuter forms, there is no reason to shift gears and read a neuter “everything” as the object of huper, when Paul has been talking about everyone, which would also be a much more logical object of “for the sake of,” or “on behalf of”.
The similarly translated – but not at all equivalent – admonition in I Thes.5:18, often rendered “Give thanks for everything”, contains neither of those prepositions, but simply en – “in”– which always has a dative (location or atmosphere) object. The grammatical structure is clear: the reference of “this” (“this is the will of God”) is the imperative verb, “give thanks”, and not, as some would have it, “everything that happens” – even events that are clearly evil.

Other objects of thanksgiving are identified by a clause introduced by hoti, “because” – (I Thes.2:13, Rev.11:17), or a participial explanation of something that God has done. This is more frequent in I Cor.15:57, II Cor.2:14, 8:16, 9:15, where charis is used rather than eucharistia.

Significantly, however, more frequent than any of these, are declarations of or admonitions to thankfulness with no expressed object – Col.3:15-17, 2:7; I Cor.14:17-18, Rev.4:9,7:12. The giving of thanks is an expected part of prayer (Phil.4:6, Col.4:2, I Tim.2:1), not as an effort to manipulate God, but rather a mind-set that pervades the entire consciousness of the faithful.
Thankfulness is an ingredient of the “recipe” for continued growth in Kingdom living (Col.2:7), the antidote for complaints against other brethren (Col.3:15), and an alternative to unwholesome conversation (Eph.5:4). It is among the praises offered around the throne of the Lamb (Rev.4:9, 7:12, 11:17)!

“And everything – whatever you all do – in word or deed – (do) everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, (continually) giving thanks to God the Father through him!” (Col.3:17)

It is important to remember, in undertaking a study of the uses of “pray/prayer” in the New Testament, that in the Elizabethan English of the KJV, “pray” did not necessarily have anything whatever to do with God, but “I pray thee” was merely a polite way of saying “please.” This is seen in fully half of the appearances of deomai, nine of which were traditionally translated “beseech”, primarily in Luke and Acts, and erotao, in which 23x the translators used “ask” (as in, to ask a question, make a request, or issue an invitation), “beseech” 14x, “desire” 6x, and “entreat” once, with the same sense in six of the 14 times where it is rendered “pray.” Consequently, we are dealing here with a concept in which context is critically important.

The actual lexical definitions of the five verbs and four nouns in this group are not so very different from one another. Classically, deomai was used by Homer as “to be in need or want”, by Plato and Herodotus as “to beg a thing from a person,” and by Plutarch and Thucydides as “to beg a favor.” Dei, as a particle, usually intends “It is necessary.”

Erotao is listed as “to ask a question, to beg, or to entreat, to make a request of a person”. Euchomai did refer to “prayer” as commonly understood, but also as “an unrealizable wish, to long for, to vow, or to promise.” Parakaleo, “to summon friends for help, to invite, to exhort, to encourage,” is dealt with in W.S.#53, “The Spirit”, and #138, “comfort”. Only proseuchomai refers exclusively to the prayer of worship.
Among the nouns, only deesis, “entreaty, petition”,and proseuche, “a prayer, or place of prayer” are commonly used. Enteuxis, “conversation, petition, intercession”, appears only once (I Tim.4:5), and euche, “a prayer, vow, wish, or aspiration,” is rendered once “prayer” (Jas.5:15), and twice “vow” (Ac.18:18 and 21:23).
Much more helpful in understanding is to address three questions:

Who is doing the praying?

To whom is it addressed?

What is the subject of the prayer or request?

A few examples can serve to illustrate the value of such observations.
Deomai, as noted above, half the time is simply one person making a request of another: Ac.8:34 – the Ethiopian asking Philip to explain what he was reading; Ac.21:39 – Paul requesting the commander to allow him to speak to the crowd; Lk.5:12 and 9:38 – people begging Jesus for healing; or II Cor.5:20 – Paul urging his readers to accept his message. When addressed to God, (Mt.9:38, Lk.22:32, Rom.1:10, Ac.8:22,24; I Thes.3:10), it is usually with a very specific request in mind, although that is not completely clear in Ac.4:31 or 10:2.

Erotao, similarly, is usually one person making a request or asking a question of another: Lk.5:3 – Jesus asking Peter to launch his boat; Lk.14:18,19 – guests begging off from the banquet invitation; Ac.10:48 – Cornelius asking Peter to stay a while; or Ac.23:18 – Paul asking the guard to take his nephew to the commander. However, in John’s gospel, and only there, it is used of Jesus’ communication with the Father (Jn.14:16, 16:26, 17:9, 15, 20). Might this be a testimony to John’s depth of understanding of the mutuality and equality of their relationship?

Euchomai, except for Jas.5:16 where the flavor is more like the requests represented by deomai, leans more toward the “wish” idea, as when (Ac.27:29) the sailors “threw out the anchors and wished for daylight”.
Likewise, parakaleo, except for Jesus’ statement in Mt.26:53, is almost entirely inter-personal: the healed man who asked to go along with Jesus (Mk.5:18), the “Macedonian call” to Paul (Ac.16:9), or Paul encouraging the sailors to take food (Ac.27:34).

Proseuchomai, on the other hand, never represents simply a person-to-person situation. It is always directed to God. Even more significantly, it seldom concerns a specific “prayer-request.” It is also the only one that occurs in the imperative mood. Only three times in the gospels is an object specified: praying for one’s persecutors (Mt.5:44, Lk.6:28), Jesus praying for the children (Mt.9:13), and the admonition to pray that the flight from Jerusalem not be in winter (Mt.24:20, Mk.13:18). The rest of the praying, whether by Jesus or others, 19x, has no object mentioned. Thirteen times, it refers to Jesus’ final night in the Garden
Curiously, proseuchomai does not appear in the writings of John at all, in either his gospel or his epistles – and only twice in the Revelation. I have never encountered any speculation on a reason for that – have you?

Jesus usually seems to have preferred a “solitary place” for praying (Mt.14:23, Mk.1:35, 6:46; Lk.5:16,6:12, 9:28), although on several occasions his disciples were present, and asked to be taught (Mt.6:9, Lk.9:18, 11:1,2). Lk.9:18 is particularly puzzling in this regard: “He was praying privately, and his disciples were with him”. (The traditional version says he was “alone”. Not sure what the “dictation theory” advocates do with that!)
Jesus emphasized that prayer was not the place (if there is one) for showing off one’s piety (Mt.6:5,6,7; Mt.23:14, Mk.12:40, Lk.18:10,11; 20:47); that one must forgive before (or in the process of ) praying (Mk.11:25); and one must pray in faithfulness (Mk.11:24).

In the early church, prayer preceded the commissioning of people for specific assignments (Ac.1:24, 6:6, 13:3, 14:23) and was a frequent corporate experience in the group, led, apparently, by both men and women (I Cor.11:4,5). Paul writes of his prayers on behalf of the churches (Rom.1:9, Eph.1:16, Phil.1:4,1:8; Col.1:3,1:9, 4:12; I Thes.1:2, II Thes.1;11; and also of his own felt need for their prayers on his own behalf (II Cor.1:11, Phil.1:19, Col.4:3, I Thes.5:25, II Thes.3:1, Phm.2), as well as encouraging their prayers for each other (II Cor.9:14, Jas.5:16, Phil.4:6).
Prayers are connected with healings (Ac.9:40, 28:8, Jas.5:14), release from prison (Ac.12:12, 16:23, Phm.22), and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Ac.2, and 8:15), as well as taking leave of brethren (Ac.20:36, 21:15).

You may notice that this survey has left a large group of occasions – some already listed concerning Jesus himself, and some reporting about others – where nothing specific is said about the object of the praying: the Transfiguration accounts (Lk.9:29 and parallels), Jesus’ baptism (Lk.3:21), Saul in Damascus (Ac.9:11), Peter in Joppa (Ac.10:9 and 11:15), Cornelius at his home (Ac.10:30), Paul in the temple (Ac.22:17), and Paul’s admonitions in Rom.12:12, Eph.6:18, I Thes.5:17, I Tim.2:8, among others.

One student suggested, “It sounds like just sort of hanging out with the Lord!”

I rather like that. In fact, I think it sums up proseuchomai very well. Perhaps it is often simply making ourselves available, and waiting for instructions.
After all, (Rom.8:26) “We don’t even know how we ought to pray” – but that’s ok – the Holy Spirit can compensate for our ignorance, as long as we are “hanging out” and available.

“By means of all prayer and petition, keep on praying at all times in the Spirit, being constantly alert about it” (Eph.6:18).

“Don’t worry about anything, but in everything, by prayer (proseuche) and petition (deesis), with thanksgiving, your requests must be made known before God.” (Phil.4:6)

Proseuchesthe “Keep on praying [hanging-out with the Lord!], incessantly!” (I Thes.5:17).

It was only during work on the previous post, “bless” (#89), that it became evident that “bless” and “praise” have sometimes been used interchangeably as translations for the same word, and often appear together, especially in the praise scenes in the Revelation. There is also frequent implicit overlap with the use of “glory” (W.S.#74) and “honor” (W.S. #73). Consequently, the idea of praise to the Lord, throughout the New Testament, is far more ubiquitous than the use of any of the specific words so translated, which include six nouns and three verbs.

In three of these instances, it is an aberrant translation of a word more commonly rendered differently: “praise” is used only once for eulogeo (against 43 x “bless”) – Lk.1:64; once for arete (against 4x “virtue”) – I Pet.2:9; and four times for doxa (against 144x “glory”) – Jn.9:24, 12:43 (2x), I Pet.4:11.
Twice, it is the only translation of a rarely used word – ainesis, which is only seen in Heb.13:15, and ainos in Mt.21:16,Lk.18:43. This narrows our study conveniently to one noun and three verbs.

The most frequently appearing word is the noun epainos, which even so is only used 11x. It is classically defined as “approval, praise, or commendation”, and is applied equally to gods and men. The New Testament uses bear out that division, with Rom.2:29, 13:3; I Cor.4:5, II Cor.8:18, I Pet.1:7 and 2:14 referring to praise accorded to people, and Eph.1:6,12,14; Phil.1:11, and possibly 4:8 to the praise of God.

Second is the verb aineo, which makes 9 appearances. This too, classically, spoke of “praise or approval, and a recommendation or advice”, as well as “a way courteously to decline an invitation.” It is a very frequent admonition in the LXX, describing or urging praises to God, although it is also used disparagingly of praises to pagan gods. Aineo describes the praises of the heavenly host announcing Jesus’ birth (Lk.2:13), the awe-struck shepherds (Lk.2:20), and the jubilant crowd on Palm Sunday (Lk.19:37), as well as the constant praises offered by the empowered disciples both before (Lk.24:53) and after Pentecost (Ac.2:47), and the joyful celebration of the healed man in Ac.3:8. Rom.15:11 is quoted from the LXX, and Rev.19:5 casts “a voice from the throne” as a holy cheerleader calling both small and great to praises.

Epaineo, the verb form of epainos, common in the LXX, is less so in the New Testament, translated 4x “praise”, and once each “laud” and “commend.” All but the LXX quote in Rom.15:11 refer to people – most of whom (I Cor.11:17,22, and Lk.16:8) were not behaving very well. Its classical definitions are very parallel to those listed for the noun.

Finally, we have the four appearances of humneo: “to sing praises, to celebrate or commemorate in a hymn, to tell over and over, or ‘harp on’, repeat, or recite.” The classical epics would fall in this category, as would the later efforts of troubadours, celebrating the triumphs of gods, heroes, and conquerors. However, it is also how Paul and Silas passed the night in their Philippian jail (Ac.16:25), and how Jesus and his disciples concluded their final Passover together (Mt.26:30, Mk.14:26), in addition to the LXX quote in Heb.2:12 (from Ps.22:28).

Although the word is used at least 16x in the LXX, Trench notes that the connection with pagans celebrating their gods and heroes led to some degree of avoidance in both Jewish and early Christian practice. Alexander had been criticized (3^rd century BC) for accepting “hymns” to himself and his accomplishments instead of deferring to the gods. Among the “church fathers”, notably Origen and Jerome, it became a requirement that a “hymn” be a direct address of praise and glory to God.

Some historians see in passages like Lk.1:46-55, 68-79; Ac.4:24, 16:25; Eph.5:14, I Tim.3:16, and II Tim.2:11-14 snippets of what they interpret as an early hymn. Others call them “creeds”, which is another problem altogether!

Whether or not any specific examples remain for us, music was certainly included in the worship of the New Testament church. Paul encouraged the churches at Ephesus and Colossae (Eph.5:19 and Col.3:16) to “keep teaching and admonishing each other with psalms (psalmois), hymns (humnois), and spiritual songs (odais pneumatikais), singing in the thankfulness [grace] that’s in your hearts, to God.”
“Psalms” are the most ancient, at least in the Judeo-Christian tradition. These were probably some of the ones preserved in the Old Testament records. The word is derived from the verb, “to touch, or to pluck a stringed instrument”, with which the singing was usually accompanied. With “hymns”, the lyrics were predominant, as they celebrated honor and mighty deeds, whereas “songs” could be dirges, joyful songs of praise, or simply a recitation of lyric poetry. Singing is also part of the agenda Paul described in Corinth (I Cor.14:15), both “with [by means of] the Spirit and by means of [using] the understanding [mind]” – with either prescribed or Spirit-led language and music. It is the suggestion of James (5:3) for celebrating one’s rejoicing, and one of the vehicles of praise and tribute to the King in his consummated Kingdom (Rev.5:9, 14:3, 15:3).

In our day, as throughout the history of the people of God, “singing praises” may still be either rightly or wrongly focused. As someone has observed, “you can’t always tell whether they’re singing to/about the Lord or their girl/boyfriend!”
In the third century, Augustine, coming out of a culture not all that different from ours, prescribed three requirements for “Christian” music:

1. It must be sung.
2. It must be praise.
3. It must be to/about God.

That might still be an appropriate guide!

Songs of praise have habitually accompanied movements of renewal among the Lord’s people, both the source and the expression of great joy.

After all, by his gracious provision, (Eph.1:6), “We exist for the praise of his glory!”

We might as well start practicing!

“Let everything that hath breath, praise the Lord!” (Ps.150)

As is so frequently the case, a study of the concept of “blessing” bears little resemblance to common assumptions about the word. In all the 44 New Testament uses of the verb, eulogeo, the 8 uses of the adjective or participle eulogetos, and the 13 uses of the noun form, eulogia, only one, II Cor.9:5, where Paul applies it to the generosity of the relief offering which the Gentile churches sent to their famine-stricken Judean brethren, makes reference to anything material being given or received. The other words, makarios (49x), makarizo (2x), and makarismos (3x), have no such reference at all.
So although giving thanks for “every good gift” (W.S.#25) is certainly appropriate, the common admonition to “count (or brag about) your blessings”, if applied to acquisitions, benefits, possessions or prerogatives, might well be questioned.

Classically, eulogeo (etymologically, a combination of the prefix eu- , “good or well”, and logeo, a form of lego, “to speak or say”), usually intended “to bless or praise a god, to honor a person, or to call down or bestow blessings on someone” (L/S), and the noun form, eulogia, “a eulogy, glory or good repute, or a gift or bounty”.
The New Testament, however, tends toward a narrower usage. Frequently, it is paired with “pray / prayer” – proseuchomai , or even treated as its synonym (I Cor.14:16); or as when Jesus preceded his feeding of a crowd (Mt.14:19, Mk.6:41,8:7; Lk.9:16) with prayer, and in accounts of the Last Supper (Mt.26:26, Mk.14:22, Lk.24:30, I Cor.10:16). The use of aorist participles in those latter accounts makes “after he had prayed” a more likely rendition than the common idea of “blessing the bread” as if it were somehow magically changing its substance or character. People, and God, are “blessed” in the New Testament. Inanimate objects are not. Jesus “blessed” children (Mk.10:16), his disciples (Lk.24:50,51), and humanity in general (Ac.3:26). Simeon (Lk.2:28), the disciples (Lk.24:53), and faithful people (Jas.3:9) are said to “bless God.” The crowds that greeted Jesus in Jerusalem (Mt.21:9, 23:9, Mk.11:9,10; Lk.13:35, 19:38; Jn.12:13) proclaimed Jesus and his Kingdom “blessed”. The faithful are admonished to “bless” their persecutors (Mt.5:44, Lk.6:28, Rom.12:14, I Cor.4:12, I Pet.3:9), as well as to pray for them (Mt.5:44), and actively to do good to them (Lk.6:27).

Blessing also has to do with the conveying of an inheritance (W.S.#79,80), as in Heb.11:20,21 and 12:17, Gal.3:14, I Pet.3:9, and most notably, Jesus’ gracious invitation to the Gentiles/nations who had behaved in a faithful manner (Mt.25:34) even without recognizing him, addressing them as “blessed by my Father”, and offering them the inheritance “prepared for you from the foundation of the world”!

The title, eulogetos, “the Blessed” or “the Blessed One”, is applied exclusively to God (Mk.14:61, Lk.1:68, Rom.1:25, 9:5; II Cor.1:3,11:31; Eph.1:3, I Pet.1:3), never to anyone else.
“Blessing” is on the list of praises ascribed to the Lord Jesus in Rev.5:12,13; 7:12, although all the other uses of eulogia are specifically from God.

Makarios, on the other hand, is in another category altogether. Classically, it was used primarily of the “bliss” of the gods, or of dead heroes, although it was also used in extremely deferential address, as “honored sir…” It conveyed an especially close relationship with one’s patron gods.
This was the word Jesus chose for the faithful, according to both Matthew’s (5:3-11) and Luke’s (6:20-22) account of the “beatitudes”, in which he enumerated the results of the characteristics he expected of the citizens of his Kingdom. This deviated as sharply from the extant cultural definitions and expectations as it does from ours today. He also applied it to Peter’s recognition of his identity (Mt.16:1), and the privilege extended to his disciples to see (Mt.13:16, Lk.10:23) what many generations had longed for. It describes the condition of a servant who is found to be carefully following his master’s instructions (Mt.24:46, Lk.12:37, 38,43); the person who (Mt.11:6, Lk.7:23) “does not take offense” at Jesus and the things he is doing; and the one whose hospitality is extended to folks unable to reciprocate (Lk.14:14). Jesus gently corrected the enthusiast who cried out in the crowd, “Blessed is the one who bore you and nursed you” (Lk.11:27) by responding, (v.28) “Rather, blessed are those who are listening to the Word of God, and keeping it!”

Paul uses “blessed” of God (I Tim.1:11, 6:15), and of Jesus’ return (Tit.2:13); and James (1:12,25) of the person who persists in working at faithfulness. It is the preferred description of the faithful in the Revelation – 1:3, those who read and hear the message; 14:13, those who die in the Lord; 16:15, who stay alert for the Lord’s coming; 19:9, who are invited to the Lamb’s wedding feast; 20:6, who are a part of the first resurrection; 22:7, who keep the sayings of this book; and 22:14, who do as Jesus commands.

I think, despite the one single instance where Paul calls himself makarios to be presenting his case before Agrippa (Ac.26:2), it is safe to say that for the most part, people are not – and probably can not be – the initiators of a condition of makarios / makarismos (blessedness). It is received from the gracious hand of the Lord, as the result of a relationship of obedient conformity to his directions.
Eulogeo and its associated words, however, are within our prerogative – and indeed our responsibility – to share and convey to others, be they brethren, or antagonists, or the Lord himself.
Nineteen of the uses of eulogeo refer to “blessing” received by people, and ten by God. In fifteen instances, people are doing the “blessing” (or instructed to do so); eight time it is God/Jesus. And there are nine references where it could be a synonym for prayer. We see an interesting slant in Heb.6:7: rather than calling the provision of sun and rain on the fields “blessings”, the writer suggests that the land is “blessed” when that provision is rightly used to bear a fruitful harvest! The “blessing” appears not to be the provision, but the reward for its intended use!

Indeed, in the case of either eulogeo or makarios, “blessing” consists, not of “stuff”, nor favorably manipulated circumstances, nor of abilities, power or prestige, but rather of connectedness, through the Lord Jesus, to the Kingdom of God and its gracious Sovereign.
“(Eulogetos) Blessed (be) [praise to] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who blessed (eulogesos) us with every spiritual blessing (eulogia) in the heavens, in Christ!” (Eph.1:3)

May we gratefully receive, and faithfully share, his gracious blessing!

(See also word studies 27, 39, and 55 for more on this subject.)

“Why do you all keep calling me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and you don’t do what I say?” (Lk.6:46)
“If you all love me, you will follow my instructions [keep my commands]”. (Jn.14:15)

A perfectly reasonable question, and a perfectly reasonable statement, from the Lord Jesus himself.
Yet rare is the assembly of “believers”, seduced, as so many are, by the popular “unconditional” rhetoric, where serious attention is paid to those words.
You may notice, in the second quote, that I have violated my own rule about not using multiple translations for the same word. This is deliberate – although I do offer the alternative – because of the popular application of negative connotations which associate “commands” with threats: “You’ll be in big trouble if you don’t …..”, whereas “instructions” imply “Wonderful things can happen if you do…”or simply, “this is how it works.”
Entole, classically “a command or order”, but also “an authorization, prescription (medical), recipe, or power of attorney”, may signify either of these understandings. The difference, the interpretation, is entirely dependent upon the relationship between the people giving or receiving the commands / instructions.

The concept of obedience (v. hupakouo, n. hupakoe) in the New Testament is likewise colored by the relationship. The gospel writers marvel that the forces of nature (Mt.8:27, Mk.4:41, Lk.8:25), and even evil spirits (Mk.1:27) have no choice but to obey Jesus’ orders. Yet “obedience to the gospel” on the part of some of the priests (Ac.6:7), and others who chose loyalty to Jesus’ Kingdom (Rom.6:17, 16:19; II Cor.7:15, Phil.2:12, Heb.5:9), is in every case voluntary, and a cause for celebration, not compulsion! As Paul expressed it quite matter-of-factly, (Rom.6:16), “You all are slaves to whomever you obey,” whether for good or ill. Everybody chooses to obey someone or something.

This becomes clear if one lists the words used as objects of huupakouo: servants/slaves to masters (Eph.6:5, Col.3:22), the desires of the mortal body (Rom.6:12), “the teaching you were given” (Rom.6:17, Phil.2:12), “the gospel” (Rom.10:16, I Thes.1:8), children to parents (Eph.6:1, Col.3:20), Jesus himself (Heb.5:9), Abraham to his calling (Heb.11:8), “to the faith / faithfulness” (Rom.1:5), “the truth” (I Pet.1:22), “righteousness / justice” (Rom.6:16), and others where the object is not specified but is clearly intended to be the Lord Jesus and his Kingdom.
Classical uses of hupakouo are “to hearken, pay attention, to answer, listen, heed, or regard; to accept an invitation, to submit, comply, obey; to yield to a remedy (medical), to conform to a theory or principle (in grammar, science, or philosophy), or “to answer” as in the task of a doorkeeper.” You will note that most of these are more an indication of a general attitude than any specific details.

This is also the case with the lesser-used term, peitharcheo, “to obey a ruler or superior”. This has only four uses, of which there are two referring to God (Ac.5:29 and 5:32), and two to people: (Tit.3:1) magistrates, and Ac.27:21, where Paul is telling the ship’s captain , “You should have listened to me!”

A related, also less frequent word, peitho, more commonly rendered “persuade” (21x) or “trust” (8x), and only 7x “obey, (Ac.5:36, 37; Rom.2:8, Gal.3:1,5:7; Heb.13:17; Jas.3:3), as well as its negative apeitheo which, like the corresponding noun form apeitheia, is rendered equally “disobedience” and “unbelief”, illustrates vividly that those are not two concepts, but one – highlighting the appropriateness of the two statements of Jesus with which we began. One does not “believe” if he does not “obey!”

Interestingly, “obey” in any of its forms never occurs with “commands” as its object! Obedience, whether to a person, to the Lord, or to the principles of his Kingdom (or of another kingdom!), is a much broader concept, referring more to an orientation of one’s life than to any specific behavior. Perhaps the concept of “allegiance” is more to the point. In fact, even commands/instructions (entole), in the New Testament, are not provided as a “check-list” as they had been in the past (and still are, by some groups!) They are to be “kept” (tereo), rather than “obeyed” (hupotasso). Quite a variety of objects occur with tereo, (classically “to watch, guard, or maintain, to test by observation of trial, to keep an engagement”). These include “the commandments (of the Law) – Mt.19:17, Ac.15:5,24; Jas.2:10; “your own tradition” (Mk.7:9), “the good wine” (Jn.2:10), “my (Jesus’) sayings” (Jn.8:5,52,55), the Sabbath (Jn.9:16), “my (Jesus’) commandments” (Jn.14:15,21,23,24,15:10), “Thy word” (Jn.17:6); the disciples (Jn.17:11,12,15); “the unity of the Spirit” (Eph.4:3), and many more.

It is instructive that the “commandments / instructions” that Jesus himself speaks of “keeping”, primarily in Jn.14 and 15, uniformly concern the love that he directs and teaches his disciples to have among one another. Period.  All the rest is commentary.
Paul gets more specific on occasion, I Cor.14:31, Eph.6:2, Col.4:10. But even he spends more time detailing the failures of the “commandments of the Law” (Rom.7:8-13, I Cor.7:19, Eph.2:15, Tit.1:14) – as does the writer to the Hebrews (7:5, 16, 18; 9:19) – than he does instituting replacements.
Of course the whole New Testament is, from one perspective, a “blueprint” or “instruction manual” for the building of the Kingdom. Many admonitions, in both gospels and epistles, are cast in the imperative mood, and compliance is expected. Kingdom living is described in detail, but most of its specifics are not labeled “commands”. Hence, again, the quotation with which we began.

The prime example of obedience is described in Phil.2:6-8, where Paul notes Jesus’ deliberate renunciation of his well-deserved, privileged position, in favor of meticulous – one might even say “extreme”  — obedience. This is the attitude (v.5) that his people are urged to emulate – II Cor. 10:5 – “subjugating every mind [thought] for obedience to [of] Christ” [i.e. , modeled after his!]

We all have a lot to learn!