Seeing the Practical Side of Paul

Seeing the Practical Side of Paul

Picture

If someone were to ask you to summarize the apostle Paul’s teaching found in his letters in the New Testament, what would you say?​Chances are, like most of us who know and love Paul’s epistles, you would take a deep breath and launch into a somewhat complicated explanation of the nature of salvation, faith, law, grace, and a number of other core Christian doctrines.

But was Paul really just a “theologian’s theologian,” a “super-scholar” who concentrated on doctrine and the theory of Christianity above all else?  The answer, of course, is not at all. There are plenty of life experiences behind a great deal of what Paul tells us.  We only have to look, for example, at his first letter to the Corinthian church.  Paul has a great deal of practical guidance for Christians dealing with some of the problems and challenges of life.  But we can go further than that. There is actually a practical side to most of what Paul wrote – we just don’t always see it.

When we look at Paul’s epistles closely, we find that he frequently divides his material so that the first half of his letter stresses theological issues and the second half of the letter stresses their practical application. We can see this quite clearly in Romans, Galatians, Ephesians and Colossians, but the principle applies to most of his epistles.   In Ephesians, for example, the doctrinal portion of the letter (chapters 1-3) is followed by an ethical or Christian living section (chapters 4-6), and the whole epistle is structured around this balance.

But that’s not all.  When we focus in on almost any section of the apostle’s writings, we find that he utilizes this balanced form of teaching continually.  We just have to learn to see the pattern.  In one half of his statements Paul often presents a theological fact, and in the other half we are given the application of that fact.  Usually, it is first the doctrine, then the practice.  In fact, at a technical level, Paul actually often balances two different forms of the same verb – first the “indicative” form stressing a fact, then the “imperative” form telling us what we must do about that fact.  But the overall pattern of fact plus application of the fact is very clear when we look for it.  Consider a few examples where the indicative factual statement is italicized and the imperative command is bolded:

You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be freeBut do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love” (Galatians 5:13).

“Since, then, you have been raised with Christset your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God” (Colossians 3:1).

Sometimes we have to continue reading for several verses to get to the practical application of a point, as in this example:

For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God.  When Christ, who is your life, appears, then you also will appear with him in glory.  Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature… ” (Colossians 3:3-5).

And sometimes Paul reverses the order – placing the practical application before the doctrinal fact – but if we keep the pattern in mind, we will see the balance is still there:

Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each otherjust as in Christ God forgave you” (Ephesians 4:32).

Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed—not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence—continue to work out your salvation with fear and tremblingfor it is God who works in you to will and to act in order to fulfill his good purpose” (Philippians 2:12-13).

Whatever order he uses, once we see this pattern in Paul, every epistle becomes a clearly linked series of thoughts about what God has done and what we must do as a result.  But it is not just a way of teaching what we must do.  The “indicative-imperative dynamic,” as theologians call it, is just as much about helping us understand why we should do the things we need to do.

The balanced structure of teaching we see in these verses is certainly not something that was new to Paul – we find it occasionally in formally structured sections of instruction throughout the Bible. To take only two examples:

I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slaveryYou shall have no other gods before me …” (Exodus 20:2-3).

… Our Father in heavenYour name be honored as holy” (Matthew 6:9 HSB).

But Paul uses this structure more consistently than any other biblical writer.  If we look for it, we will find there is invariably a connection between what he tells us about what we should believe and the way we should live – between theology and morality, orthodoxy and orthopraxy, belief and practice, doctrine and living.

As we study his epistles, we should continually ask “What is the fact Paul is stating?” and “What is he saying we should do as a result of that fact?  If we do this consistently, we will often see the point he is making far more clearly – and not miss the guidance he gives us.  Keeping this simple principle in mind can help us to navigate through Paul’s sometimes dense and even difficult writing (2 Peter 3:16) by better keeping up with his arguments and the significance of what he is telling us.

Paul wasn’t just about theology, and focusing on the practical side of his letters can often help us to better understand much of what he wrote. After all, it was Paul himself who said “Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice” (Philippians 4:9).


Following – At a Safe Distance

Following – At a Safe Distance

“Those who had arrested Jesus took him to Caiaphas the high priest … But Peter followed him at a distance, right up to the courtyard of the high priest. He entered and sat down with the guards to see the outcome” (Matthew 26:57-59).

The description of Peter – who had only recently insisted that he would follow Jesus to the death if necessary (John 13:37) – as following at a safe distance after Jesus’ arrest is one of the most unflattering stories in the New Testament.  When the “chips were down,” Peter did not stick with the One he acknowledged as the Christ; though later, after his empowerment by the Spirit of God, he did, of course, follow Jesus to the end.

There are two aspects of what Matthew says about this event that we can apply to ourselves – two ways that we too can fail in following. First, we see that Peter “followed him at a distance.”  Do we do this in our lives?  If we are only partially involved in our religious beliefs, if we think of our religion  as only what we do in church, and not in our everyday lives, we are certainly following Him at a distance.

But there is also another type of distance following. We can fail to follow closely in time as well as in space. Notice that when Peter followed Jesus to the high priest’s courtyard he then “sat down ..to see the outcome.”  Do we wait to see the outcome of things before committing ourselves to following more closely?  That is the attitude of millions of people through history who have attempted to strike a bargain with God: “If you will do this – rescue me, heal me, help me or whatever – I will do better, follow you more closely.”  Although God may sometimes intervene to answer sincere prayers of this type, we must beware of putting off obedience until God has “done His side of the deal.” We can do this, for example,  by waiting till we feel our finances are in order before helping others, or in countless other ways.  Although we may feel we are sincere in these things, it’s really just following at a safe distance. We need to be following in the here and now.

It helps to remember that “Follow me” was Jesus’ first command to his disciples (Mark 1:17), and it is also his last recorded command in the Gospel of John (John 21:19). Significantly, it was to Peter that Jesus addressed that command, and repeated it, after His resurrection (John 21:21), though it clearly applies to every disciple.  Peter had to learn, and be reminded, that following Jesus  and saying we are following Jesus are not the same – and that following at a distance is not really following at all.

It’s a lesson we all need to remember at times, because God wants real followers rather than those of the “distant” or “eventual” type.   We see this in the Old Testament where God says:  “Because they have not followed me wholeheartedly, not one of those who were twenty years old or more when they came up out of Egypt will see the land I promised …” (Numbers 32:11).  We see it throughout the New Testament where numerous people failed to follow because they wanted to follow later, or at a distance: “[Jesus] said to another man, ‘Follow me.’ But he replied, ‘Lord, first let me go and bury my father’ …. Still another said, ‘I will follow you, Lord; but first let me go back and say goodbye to my family’ ” (Luke 9:59-61).

The whole point of following is really to follow as closely as possible. Jesus was explicit about this, saying: “Whoever serves me must follow me; and where I am, my servant also will be” (John 12:26).  That clearly implies following by walking with him rather than following at a safe distance.