Praise be

Peter is a much more concise writer than Paul. Paul was gifted in his ability to thoroughly explain complex points of doctrine, or to craft beautiful passages of praise. Blunt, direct fisherman Peter was gifted in his ability to say a lot with a few words. That's why I never get very far reading him before he engages my thoughts. 

And that's why this morning, intending to read more, I quit after just two verses (1 Peter 1:3-4) "Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade. This inheritance is kept in heaven for you."

Wow, there's a lot there. God's great mercy . . . New birth . . . Living hope . . . Jesus' resurrection . . . An indestructible inheritance . . . Kept in heaven for me. Any one of those would make a sermon.

It's like Peter can't help himself. He meant to say, "Praise God," and then he needed to say why, and this whole amazing thing of salvation and eternal life just comes bubbling out. Remember, it was all brand new for Peter, and so it was still very exciting,

I wish I was that excited. I wish every time I started saying something simple, like hello, I wound up pouring out my excitement about the most significant and important thing in my life. And I wish when that did happen, that thing was my salvation and not some earthly triumph.

All from a simple working guy, Peter, someone I'd probably look down on if I met him. If God used Peter, He can use me. He's probably trying to; I may just not be as cooperative.

Elect exiles

I love the way the apostles started their letters. I used to just skip over the intros, but if you pay attention, there's a lot there.

Look at how Peter starts 1 Peter: "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you."

When I read that this morning, I was struck by two things. First, he addresses Christians in these far-flung places as "elect exiles of the dispersion." The dispersion, of course, was that displacement of Christian Jews when they fled Israel under persecution. These displaced persons, rebuilding their lives in far-away places, Peter calls "elect exiles." He could just mean elect in exile, but it sounds like he may mean elected to be exiled. That isn't a bad reading, because the dispersion was God's way of quickly spreading the Gospel and growing the early church.

The second thing that hit me about this introduction supports that viewpoint, and that's Peter's description of the involvement of the Trinity. Peter says these elect were dispersed according to the foreknowledge of God, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for the obedience of Jesus and for the sprinkling of his blood.

In other words, these Jews were far from home because God planned it that way. They were sent out in obedience to Jesus' call to go into the world and spread the gospel. And they were equipped, and were continually becoming better equipped, by the Holy Spirit.

You probably see it already: that's a great definition of us. Elect exiles, here on earth to do Jesus' work of spreading the Gospel, guided by the Spirit, according to God's great plan of salvation. We're just the latest in a long line of faithful followers stretching all the way back to places we've never heard of.

Curses

There's something curious at the end of 1 Corinthians.

Paul does his usual thing, passing on greetings from various churches and people. "The churches in the province of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Priscilla greet you warmly in the Lord, and so does the church that meets at their house. All the brothers here send you greetings. Greet one another with a holy kiss." (1 Cor 16:19-20)

These greetings, standard as they are in the New Testament letters, are pleasant because they suggest a sense of community we don't have. Separated by days worth of travel, these churches still felt closer to each other than to the communities they lived in. In fact, many of those early Christians, separated by miles of rough geography, knew each other by name - Aquila and Priscilla, for example.

But then Paul writes something unexpected: "If anyone does not love the Lord –a curse be on him." (v22).

Wow, really? It's OK to curse people? Remember, Paul isn't cursing at these folks, like using bad language to let them know how unhappy he is. He's cursing them, as in the opposite of blessing. Putting a curse on someone was to make (if you believed in supernatural powers, which most people did back then) or at least want something bad to happen to that person. Maybe they would break a leg or get boils, maybe something worse.

To put a curse on someone seems vindictive and mean. To me, there's a connotation of vengefulness, as if Paul would like to get even with all those who stoned him and jailed him. But that would be completely out of character for Paul.

Knowing Paul, I'd bet he means people who have heard the gospel but still don't love God. And it seems likely, in the context of this book, that he has on his mind those who lead others astray with their divisiveness and false teaching. Even so, this whole curse business makes me uncomfortable, just like God's orders to the Israelites in the Old Testament to slaughter entire towns.

I don't claim to understand it, but it reminds me that sin is serious business, and that sinners deserve death. Jesus said that someone who causes a child to sin would be better off jumping in the ocean with an anchor around his neck. We have such a nice faith, one characterized by love, that we forget that the justice side of it calls for our blood.

Sobering, but if we forget that, the cross is of no use to us. Jesus blood only has meaning in the context of my sin. I dare not take that lightly.

Submission

I hate to submit. I don't always want to lead, I just don't want to have to listen to someone else. I especially don't like having to change what I want to do because someone else wants something different.

In 1 Cor 16:15-18, Paul describes two kinds of people the Corinthian Christians should submit to. "You know that the household of Stephanas were the first converts in Achaia, and they have devoted themselves to the service of the saints. I urge you, brothers, to submit to such as these and to everyone who joins in the work, and labors at it. I was glad when Stephanas, Fortunatus and Achaicus arrived, because they have supplied what was lacking from you. For they refreshed my spirit and yours also. Such men deserve recognition."

The household of Stephanas had been doing God's work the longest. It's easy to see why Paul might direct the church to submit to them - they'd paid their dues, they had more experience, they had seniority. You might assume Paul is saying, "These folks have earned their spurs; pay attention to them and learn."

Except the second category of people Paul calls the church to submit to is "everyone who joins the work." That's a little harder to swallow; that means some guy who just converted yesterday can direct me.

I wonder about the point Paul is making here. Is he saying that any Christian who is diligently laboring should be heeded? That's a valid interpretation. I remember Blackaby (Desiring God) writing that every time we see God at work, that's an invitation to join. Maybe these busy beavers have every right to ask us to jump in and expect us to comply.

Or maybe this is just a more general point about submitting to one another in order to avoid conflict. Remember, this letter started out with Paul challenging the divisions caused by followers picking their favorite teacher, Paul or Apollos.

Or maybe this was something specific to the church at Corinth; Paul does say that these diligent workers provided what the Corinthian church couldn't, or at least didn't: they refreshed Paul's spirit and that of other Christians. In other words, they came and served, and encouraged. In that case, I need to look at how I support fellow Christians to know if that applies to me.

In any case, this instruction points out something that Paul, and presumably God, values. Obedient living means serving, which among other things will refresh fellow believers. If I'm doing that, I have a right to expect others to help. If I'm not, I'd better find some worker to join. At that point, they have every right to lead, and I should follow.

Unwilling

Paul also has a personal word about Apollos, and this is one of those things that make me wonder why God wanted some things included in scripture. Paul says (1 Cor 16:12) "Now about our brother Apollos: I strongly urged him to go to you with the brothers. He was quite unwilling to go now, but he will go when he has the opportunity."

You might remember Apollos as the other leader that some in the church preferred over Paul. That makes me think a few things about this verse.

First, Paul really must not have cared about this rival. He not only wrote elsewhere that it didn't matter who got credit, that it was God at work, but he actually wanted Apollos to go to Corinth when Paul couldn't. I think that shows that Paul just wanted the gospel to be spread and the church to be served. No empire-building there.

Second, I wonder what Apollos had going on that made now a bad time. Obviously Apollos didn't feel compelled to do what Paul asked him to; he wasn't in a good position to go at the moment but would when he could. Maybe that little fact is in the Bible just to let us know that sometimes our calls aren't immediate or time-specific. Maybe a closed door today just means wait a little bit,

There are some good things to ponder here. The first is how my feeble attempts at ministry compare to Paul's all-consuming passion. I'm more likely to exclude competitors and rivals, or, more accurately, people I just don't like very well. And I like the idea of my own empire, a little Kingdom of Greg where everyone loves me and thinks I'm brilliant. I'm afraid any honest evaluation of my motives would make my efforts to serve actually look self-serving.

The second is that maybe I need to look at calling(s) not as a once-and-done sort of thing. Maybe what God wants me to be doing is more fluid than that. Maybe it changes by the month, or even the day. Maybe what He has me doing today is just to prepare me to do something different tomorrow. Instead of settling into a comfortable place, maybe I need to be asking for orders every day.

And maybe once I'm done with this book I need to move on to a different author. Paul's unrelenting energy for obedience is a hard example to follow.

No fear

Paul's instruction to the Corinthians regarding Timothy is kind of strange. "If Timothy comes, see to it that he has nothing to fear while he is with you, for he is carrying on the work of the Lord, just as I am. No one, then, should refuse to accept him. Send him on his way in peace so that he may return to me. I am expecting him along with the brothers." (1 Cor 16:9-10)

See to it that he has nothing to fear? What should make him afraid? What threat should there be in visiting fellow Christians? Paul suggests they might not accept him, and tries to assure the Corinthians that Timothy is one of the good guys.

It's interesting to me that this problem of acceptance was already a feature of the early church. It seems to me that we have it in spades. I know I can be pretty skeptical of a speaker who isn't Calvinist, and I've even been known to refuse to listen to someone who's too charismatic or conservative. I don't think that makes me abnormal.

But it's sad to think that we in the church can be so close-minded that some might fear to come to us. At a minimum shouldn't we be able to worship and fellowship with anyone who follows the same Lord we do? How much better wouldn't it be if we were secure enough to listen to new ideas.

Debate or even open conflict among believers should be nothing to fear if we model ourselves after Jesus. The only ones who were afraid of Jesus were demons and those who opposed His rule.

Paul saw that unless he ran some interference, Timothy was likely to have an unpleasant experience in the church at Corinth. I need to ask myself who I make feel unwelcome in my church. It's probably more people than I realize.

Opposition

I wonder if Paul saw anything the way I do.

In 1 Corinthians 16:5-9, he's making plans. He got through the business part of the letter and now he's passing on a few personal messages, and he starts by letting the Corinthians know he's coming for a visit. He says he'd like to make it a good long visit, but he's going to go to Macedonia first. And he intends to stay in Ephesus until Pentecost.

Why? Because he has this great opportunity to do work a lot of people are opposed to. Really - listen to verses 8 and 9: "But I will stay on at Ephesus until Pentecost, because a great door for effective work has opened to me, and there are many who oppose me."

Like most folks, I sometimes talk about doors opening and windows of opportunity. But to me, one of the characteristics I use to define that opportunity is the fact that there's not much resistance. I never say, "I knew that was God's leading because I had to kick the door in."

When I encounter resistance, I re-evaluate. I ask why I seem to be out of sync with so many people. I probe to learn why people don't seem to value what I'm trying to do. And in the end I often decide that God is signaling me to spend my time somewhere else.

But Paul's example makes me wonder about that approach. Paul has only one criteria for plowing ahead: are there souls to be won? The more the better. The opposition just means it will take a little longer.

That challenges me, because I think there's a key difference between how Paul and I approach ministry. Paul never forgets his role as co-worker with God, or more accurately foot soldier in the Lord's army. Paul discounts opposition because he knows nothing can stand against the will of God.

I think about what I can get done in my own strength. I say with my mouth but don't really expect to see in reality that God can change hearts, He can provide resources, He will sustain me with energy and enthusiasm. I say those things, but when I'm doing my relative combat power analysis I seldom take Him into account. Then it's me against the world.

No wonder I retreat so often.