O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith.

(1 Timothy 5.20-21, KJV)

Even in childhood I loved science, so it was alarming to find God condemning it. It didn’t help that I only read from the King James Version, and foolishly thought other versions like the New American Standard, New International, or even the New King James, were dumbed down Bibles for people too stupid to understand the real word of God. I grew up and realized how ridiculous that was, and was relieved to reconcile science with faith through better translations such as, “contradictions of what is falsely called ‘knowledge’” (v20). That’s it, the problem isn’t science! The problem is when people think they know something, but really don’t.

This was further explained by the etymology of science, which comes from the Latin scio, meaning “I know.” But later still, I realized that—although for woefully wrong reasons—my childish interpretation of this passage hadn’t been all that far off the mark.

Take, for example, the recent history of teaching kids how to read. The traditional method was to sound out words, one letter at a time; but in the 80s and 90s it was widely replaced with a new style, “cueing.” We can decipher all sorts of nonsense, as long as we have sufficient contextual cues.

Do yuo uednratnsd tihs snetecne?

You probably didn’t have much trouble with it. As long as the first letter is in the right place (and ideally the last one), you can guess what jumbled words are supposed to say pretty well. I’d heard of kids reading this way, and thought it was just laziness—a failure to apply the lessons given by teachers. But no, cueing was the accepted institutional method to teach reading, for the last several decades! I don’t remember being subjected to this drivel myself, but my mother had taught me to read before I entered kindergarten, so I daydreamed (or read) through those lessons.

Yet I’ve also heard of several peers who reached 3^rd or 4^th grade, at which point their parents had to re-teach them how to read, one letter at a time, because this newfangled curriculum was so terrible. How did this happen? Well, a language scientist named Ken Goodman formulated a theory based on his research, and other scientists like Marie Clay and Lucy Calkins developed curricula based on that theory and their own related research. These scientists had concluded that cueing was a better way to teach reading. Despite every tradition reaching back to the invention of writing around 3,000 BC, modern science had found a better way!

Of course, literacy plummeted. I could bore you with statistics, but for a more visceral demonstration, read a children’s book from the mid-20th century or before—say, C.S. Lewis’ Chronicles of Narnia, Orwell’s Animal Farm, R.L. Stevenson’s Treasure Island, or Kipling’s Jungle Book. All of these were aimed at upper grade school aged children, and you’ll probably find them more difficult than most adult-oriented literature produced in the past twenty years. It’s not just outdated diction. The vocabulary was larger, the sentences longer and more complex.

Eventually people started noticing this. Other scientists tried to raise the alarm, but nothing happened, until covid lockdowns put parents in the same room as their kids during Zoom school. Parents were shocked, and raised a fuss, finally creating enough momentum to legislate this trash out of most classrooms. A more scientific approach is becoming more common. What is that more scientific approach? It’s the same one people used ever since the invention of writing, until science messed everything up in the first place.

What’s the point of this little story? Simply that a generation of scientists rejected the wisdom of their forebears, and made a rotten mess of the very thing they promised to fix. Parents—representatives of tradition—saw what was going on, and exercised common sense to diagnose the problem and fix it; and then it was proclaimed that science had won out over ignorance! How absurd! Real science and knowledge are wonderful! But many people have rejected God, and pledged their devotion to science instead. By its very nature, science is a process of trial and error, slowly uncovering the truth; yet whatever new ideas scientists proclaim are immediately accepted by those who have set up science as an idol to replace God. Scientists blunder, and in time are corrected; in the meantime,  great mobs are led into folly. Often these idolaters will mock those who disagree, calling them stupid. When the science comes back around to proclaim what the holdouts always knew, the idolaters still  mock them for not having previously believed what they themselves now acknowledge to be false—if science itself was wrong, why should I be embarrassed to have been likewise mistaken?

These idolaters worship a god that can contradict itself with impunity and fail repeatedly without losing its worshipers’ trust. It deserves the same contempt Elijah had for Ba’al and his worshipers.

“Cry aloud, for he is a god. Either he is musing, or he is relieving himself, or he is on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep and must be awakened.”

(1 Kings 18.27)

Knowledge is wonderful, and science has its place; but they are tools to be wielded, not gods to be worshipped. Worship the Lord,

who made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, who keeps faith forever…

(Psalm 146.6)

Jeremy Nettles

In last week’s article, we examined a trend common among God’s people, in which they find themselves at times without a tribe, standing alone with both sides of a dispute attacking or heaping scorn upon them. This uncomfortable situation is part of God’s plan, as Jesus said to his brothers, “The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify about it that its works are evil” (Jn 7.7). In fact, Jesus is the touchstone example of this trend. The Judean Jews looked down on those from Galilee and the Galileans resented it; but they were united in rejecting Jesus! The Pharisees and Sadducees disagreed religiously and politically, and despised each other; but they were united to get rid of Jesus! The Jews and Romans hated each other; but they were united to kill Jesus!

This was symbolized neatly in Jesus’ crucifixion, when he was suspended between earth and heaven, out of place in either. He was out of place on earth, because he was truly righteous, despite enduring the same temptation “common to man” (1Co 10.13). He was out of place in heaven, because he had “emptied himself” and become human (Php 2.7). He had to finish his task on earth and be reborn from the grave, so to speak, in a “glorious body” (Php 3.21), before ascending back to his Father’s throne, “crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death” (He 2.9). As we observed last week, Jesus had predicted this very thing—as well as its dual nature, at once honoring and scorning him—in his nocturnal discussion with timid Nicodemus. Jesus referred to the incident recorded in Numbers 21 in which the Israelites grumbled against God in the wilderness and were punished by a plague of venomous snakes. Afterward God directed Moses to give them an emblem, suspended on a pole, to look upon in faith and be healed. The similarity to Jesus’ crucifixion is obvious,  but there’s another, more subtle, Old Testament reference embedded in this prediction from Jesus.

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

(John 3.14-15)

Note the repetition of the phrase, “lifted up.” This doesn’t appear to be distinctive from the outset—it’s a common phrase. Forms of the Greek word, ὑψόω-hupsŏō, show up eighteen times in the New Testament, and nearly two hundred in the Greek Old Testament! But when we examine them, a clearer picture appears. Of the New Testament uses, nearly all of them refer to lifting up eyes or hands, or else make a promise or observation about the lowly being exalted. Only seven times does it refer directly to Jesus. Two of those are in successive versions of the same sermon by Peter in the book of Acts (2.33 & 5.31); the other five are all in John’s Gospel.

But could it be referring to a specific Old Testament passage, when the word in question is so commonly found there? It would be tedious to examine each case, but suffice to say, several of its uses, especially in the Psalms, could be construed as at least vaguely Messianic; but only one is blatantly obvious.

Behold, my servant shall act wisely;

he shall be high and lifted up,

and shall be exalted.

(Isaiah 52.13)

Jesus also spoke of this to the religious leaders in Jerusalem, who were already scheming to get rid of him (cf. Jn 7.32, 45-52). He said they did not know God (8.19), that they were “from below” (v23), and that they would die in their sins (vv21 & 24). Then he told them,

“When you have lifted up the Son of man, then you will know that I am he…”

(John 8.28)

He’s not talking about glorification. He means his upcoming crucifixion. Crucifixion was a horrible way to die, and part of the misery came from becoming a public spectacle of shame and death. Prior to being affixed to the cross, the victim was generally flogged within an inch of his life, so that his body was practically destroyed, even before he was stripped naked, stretched out on the cross, and lifted up for all to see. Back in Isaiah, right after saying his servant would be lifted up and exalted, God added,

his appearance was so marred, beyond human semblance,

and his form beyond that of the children of mankind…

(Isaiah 52.14)

These two ways of being lifted up stand in stark contrast, and emphasize the point about being stuck in the middle, as we discussed last week. But Jesus said one more thing about his being “lifted up.”

“Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die.

(John 12.31-33)

Perhaps we no longer needed John’s interpretive note; and Jesus’ audience on this occasion likewise understood what he meant (cf. v24). But what about the rest of what he said? This is bigger than the nation of Israel, involving “all people”! Once again, that brings us back to the next lines from Isaiah.

…so shall he sprinkle many nations.

Kings shall shut their mouths because of him,

for that which has not been told them they see,

and that which they have not heard they understand.

(Isaiah 52.15)

This was always God’s plan—to send his Son into the world, to be lifted up by all men. You must choose whether to lift him up as an object of derision and contempt, or one of admiration and hope for life.

Jeremy Nettles

But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.

When many days had passed, the Jews plotted to kill him, but their plot became known to Saul. They were watching the gates day and night in order to kill him, but his disciples took him by night and let him down through an opening in the wall, lowering him in a basket.

And when he had come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join the disciples. And they were all afraid of him, for they did not believe that he was a disciple.

(Acts 9.22-26)

When the Apostle Paul became a Christian, it required him to leave the comforts he had previously enjoyed. He had felt at home in the company of zealous colleagues who applauded his ruthless misapplication of the Law of Moses in dealing with the growing number of Christians. From a fleshly point of view, life was good, and the future was bright. Yet, after Paul was confronted by Jesus and surrendered his life to serve the Lord, his old friends turned against him and began to plot his murder, as they had plotted Jesus’ before. Yet, while Paul was ready to show love for his fellow Christians, most of them refused, at first, to accept him as a brother. There he stood, stuck in the middle.

When the gospel spread to gentiles, Jewish Christians struggled to accept that the church was no longer entirely Jewish. Hardliners insisted, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses” (Ac 15.5)—that one must be a Jew, to be a Christian. Meanwhile, the new converts’ gentile friends were no longer friendly. The “unbelieving Jews stirred up the Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brothers” (14.2), until they were ready “to mistreat them and to stone” the messengers (v5). Jews and gentiles agreed on very little. The main reason recorded in extra-biblical sources for gentile persecution of Christians is that they were—as their former friends saw it—acting Jewish. Meanwhile, Jews despised gentiles, and resented those who—as they saw it—twisted the Scriptures to make Jesus into a false Messiah. New gentile converts were in a maddening position! Jews, Jewish Christians, and pagan gentiles could only agree on one thing, and that was malice toward gentile Christians. And there they stood, stuck in the middle.

Of course, Jesus had been through all of this, before. He blazed the trail! For example, after Judas betrayed him to the authorities, the priests, Pharisees, Roman governor Pilate, and king Herod played hot potato with Jesus through a long and miserable night. The only thing they could agree on was that Jesus would be killed, but no one wanted to take sole responsibility for it. In one instance that encapsulates the whole, Pilate tried to dump the problem of Jesus in Herod’s lap.

And Herod with his soldiers treated him with contempt and mocked him. Then, arraying him in splendid clothing, he sent him back to Pilate. And Herod and Pilate became friends with each other that very day, for before this they had been at enmity with each other.

(Luke 23.11-12)

These individuals and groups usually spent their time wrestling with the others for power, often openly hostile toward each other. There Jesus stood, stuck in the middle.

This should not surprise us. In Luke’s Beatitudes, Jesus taught about this, saying,

“Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man! Rejoice in that day, and leap for joy, for behold, your reward is great in heaven; for so their fathers did to the prophets.

(Luke 6.22-23)

Then, in the Woes that follow, he said,

Woe to you, when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets.

(Luke 6.26)

It’s not that being universally hated is evidence of your righteousness; you could  more easily secure such hatred by doing evil to everyone, and Jesus gives us the opposite instruction! But he says it’s a blessing when you are hated “on account of the Son of Man!” In that case, they only hate you, because they hate Jesus. It’s also not as if you should be suspicious of anyone, purely on the grounds that too many people have good things to say about them. Consider Dorcas, who won glowing testimony from everyone present (Ac 9.29-40). This was not evidence of something insidious in her. But at the same time, you can be sure that someone not present on that occasion had bad things to say about Dorcas, because “everyone who does wicked things hates the light” (Jn 3.20).

If you follow Christ, you should expect to occasionally find yourself stuck in the middle, badly treated both by enemies and by those who should be friends. Don’t be surprised at this. Christians should not feel completely at home in this world, because “our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Php 3.20). Jesus provides for us the paramount image of one stuck in the middle. He had said, “as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up” (Jn 3.14). This referred to his crucifixion. He was made an emblem of shame and misery—but also a spectacle to be sought in faith, leading to healing. He was suspended between the earth and heaven, not fully at home in either place. At the same time, while evil men thrust him upward in a gesture of defiance to God, Jesus found himself, symbolically, between his heavenly Father and the creatures who deserved his wrath. He was in the most uncomfortable position possible, and yet it was exactly where he needed to be—stuck in the middle. Follow him, even there.

Jeremy Nettles

A Psalm of David.

O Lord, who shall sojourn in your tent?

        Who shall dwell on your holy hill?

He who walks blamelessly and does what is right

        and speaks truth in his heart;

who does not slander with his tongue

        and does no evil to his neighbor,

        nor takes up a reproach against his friend;

in whose eyes a vile person is despised,

        but who honors those who fear the Lord;

who swears to his own hurt and does not change;

who does not put out his money at interest

        and does not take a bribe against the innocent.

He who does these things shall never be moved.

(Psalm 15)

The superscript of this Psalm identifies it as one of David’s works. It became fashionable in liberal scholarship circles of the 1800s to dispute the validity of these titles—at the same time these scholars were sowing doubt about literally everything else in the Bible, it’s worth noting. As a result, some Christians to this day maintain that the superscripts in the book of Psalms are not inspired. This is a mistake. It’s worth discussing the evidence presented by these scholarly skeptics and using it to better understand the Psalms and their purpose. However, we should keep in mind that Jesus and his Apostles took these titles seriously (e.g. Mt 22.43-44, Ac 2.25, Ro 4.6-7); are we in any position to correct them on this point?

All of this being the case, we should read Psalm 15 as if it originates from, and pertains to, David. That’s a lot of work before the first line of the Psalm, but it helps us establish the context. Verse 1 asks what sort of person can sojourn with God, in his tent, on his hill. That hill is, of course, Zion (cf. Ps 2.6), but the temple had not yet been built there, when David wrote! The ark of the covenant still stood in a temporary structure, after the pattern of the tabernacle—hence David’s choice of words. Between the tent and the sojourning, we are reminded that, on this earth, we are not truly at home. Yet, as we go through life, our goal should be to dwell as near to God as we can, and to seek an eternal home with him. As God’s chosen hill Zion is holy, so is God himself. He does not allow what is unholy to abide in his presence, and so David ponders what sort of person God will permit to live with him.

“He who walks blamelessly and does what is right and speaks truth in his heart” (v2) can dwell with God. The idea of blamelessness is that no one can bring an unresolved charge against this person. But in addition to good behavior that cannot be condemned by the public, he who would dwell with God must also maintain internal discipline, speaking “truth in his heart.” This is harder, requiring humility and constant self-examination.

He “who does not slander with his tongue

and does no evil to his neighbor, nor takes up a reproach against his friend” (v3) can dwell with God. Our tongues are usually the first offenders, but speech is often followed by action. Be careful not to speak treacherously.

He “in whose eyes a vile person is despised,

but who honors those who fear the Lord” (v4a) can dwell with God. It’s not that we should make ourselves out to be each other’s judges; but who are your friends? Whom do you allow to influence you?

He “who swears to his own hurt and does not change” (v4b) can dwell with God. Do you honor your commitments? What kind of excuses suffice, for you to rationalize away the guilt of breaking promises? Is your word reliable?

He “who does not put out his money at interest and does not take a bribe against the innocent” (v5a) can dwell with God. Greed is common. It’s not a sin to have wealth; but gain it honestly and justly, and use it the same way! God also possesses great wealth, and he lavishes it upon the undeserving.

“He who does these things shall never be moved” (v5b). Moved from where? Why, from, God’s tent, on his holy hill, of course! This Psalm’s final observation is a more primitive version of what Paul later wrote,

For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

 (Romans 8.38-39)

No one and nothing has the power to take us away from God’s presence—if we are righteous and holy, as God is righteous and holy. Therein lies the problem. The picture of a righteous man, which Psalm 15 built for us, is a lovely summary of the ideal; but while it’s tool of great value in helping us mold and direct our behaviors and attitudes day by day, it also serves to convict us. Even if men find no fault in you, can you really claim to be blameless before God? As David’s wise son Solomon wrote, “Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins” (Ec 7.20). Yet Paul, who well knew both this fact and his own massive weight of guilt before God, gave us that statement of eternal security!  How can this be?

I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

(Galatians 2.20)

This is the point. You don’t deserve to dwell with God. Try as you might—as you ought—you don’t live up to God’s standard. The one who can sojourn in God’s tent is the one who acts like God. If you have been crucified with Christ and allow him to replace you, then you will act like God, and abide with him.

Jeremy Nettles

And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

If we live by the Spirit, let us also keep in step with the Spirit.

(Galatians 5.24-25)

In last week’s article, we examined a long list of “the works of the flesh” (Ga 5.19), and found them to cover both the misuse of our bodies, and the problems of the heart that bore them. We found that they involved both individuals’ misdeeds, and their ramifications on a group—that is, on the church. We read a strong warning to cease these behaviors!

But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law.

(Galatians 5.22-23)

This list is considerably shorter, and the final point is obvious—while even worldly people , themselves embroiled in the works of the flesh, are likely to find fault with at least some sinful behaviors, no one in his right mind could condemn the fruit of the Spirit!

Love

To attempt to define love to everyone’s satisfaction would be folly. It’s also a mistake to carve out for the Greek word behind this, ἀγάπη-agapē, one particular shade of love. Certainly, different shades exist, and often the vocabulary used to describe them reflects this; but it’s more of a tendency, than a hard and fast rule. Nevertheless, we could describe love, generally, as willing and pursuing what is good for someone.

Joy

As a general rule, a word’s age is tied to its length. Short words are also old ones, which serve as the core building blocks. Conversely, multisyllabic monstrosities exhibit intrusion by nonnative influences, resulting in nebulous or incomprehensible communication. Joy, one of the old, simple building blocks, is so basic as to be almost undefinable! We can say what it is not, however! Joy is more than contentedness; more than passing pleasure. It is not satisfaction with the moment, lacking regard for the future. The Christian is joyful, even in the midst of suffering, because he knows his suffering has a sanctifying purpose, and that his eternal future is secure!

Peace

This is another short, old, elemental word. It’s easiest to define in negative terms—the absence of conflict. But, of course, that’s not always up to us! Christians are at war with Satan and his kingdom—the world—every day! That being the case, how can we be expected to exhibit peace? It works, because the enemies we face have already lost the war—most of them just don’t know it, yet. While we continue to fight them in minor skirmishes, our important conflicts are within—and surrendering to Christ quells them.

Patience

In older versions of the Bible this is rendered, longsuffering, and that archaic word is an excellent description of this quality. In a culture that encourages all to insist their rights be fully honored always, Christians are supposed to have the longest fuse. The world demands that everything be perfect right now, but God tells his children not to expect perfection until we dwell with him forever.

Kindness

The world today has equated this to being nice—that is, agreeable. But that’s not what God means! χρηστότης-chrēstotēs means having upright interactions and being helpful to others. The difference is subtle, but in today’s society being nice amounts to being careful not to hurt anyone’s feelings, while being kind includes warning people when they are headed down the path of destruction, even if they don’t like to hear it.

Goodness

It seems silly to describe goodness, but it’s worth pointing out that this does not mean pleasantness. Rather, it is uprightness. The focus is on moral quality, not aesthetic.

Faithfulness

Faith is a tough concept to pin down. At its core, it’s simply belief, but through a series of steps can also mean loyalty—even reliability. So what does it mean, in this case? The whole package! It begins with believing that God “exists and that he rewards those who seek him” (He 11.6). That naturally leads to seeking him, obeying his instructions, becoming and remaining attached to him. Since he tells us to love his other children, it also means becoming a steadfast friend to God’s people.

Gentleness

Rendered meekness in older versions of the Bible, this word does not convey gentleness through weakness—an inability to be harsh. Rather, it is a chosen mindset and behavior. In fact, πραΰτης-prautēs ordinarily means humility, and only by extension gains the sense of treating others with a light touch.

Self-control

The person who lacks self-control is not ruled by something external, but rather gives in “when he is lured and enticed by his own desire” (Ja 1.14). To put it another way, self-control does not mean oneself being in control, but having oneself under control!

Against such things…

Like the preceding list of the works of the flesh (vv19-21), this list of the fruit of the spirit is not intended to be exhaustive. But it’s an excellent list to memorize, and still better to pursue these things in daily life! Having a clear understanding of what they are will help, but your effort will be futile—doomed to fail from the start—unless you “have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires” and “belong to Christ” (v24). Only then will you bear the kind of fruit everyone recognizes as good.

Jeremy Nettles