Building up or knocking down? Ephesians 4:29-30

Ever since I saw Building 429 at ALIVE I have been thinking about this verse.  Building 429 takes its name from this verse, and they did a nice job at explaining how they felt that all of their songs should be sung only to build people up!  Then today, I came across a John Piper teaching on Ephesians 4:29.  So that was it...its time to blog about it.

Ephesians 4:29-30

Let no rotten word come out of your mouth, but if something is good for the upbuilding of a need, (let that come out of your mouth) in order that it might give grace to those who hear.

I remember one time as a child that my dad actually washed my mouth out with soap. He took me to the bathroom sink, rubbed the bar of soap around in my mouth and then rinsed it out and made me go to my room. Do you know what I had said? I think I had called my brother "stupid" or something like that.

This may sound like an over reaction based on today's standards, but if you look at scripture then you believe it when Jesus said, "It is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man" (Mt. 15:11).

I had made myself defiled by calling my brother a name.
"But really!" someone will say, "What's the big deal with calling someone a name? It's not swearing. It's not taking the name of the Lord in vain. It's not a dirty word. Why get so worked up? What's really so bad about it?"

The answer is that when I call someone a name, or when we speak poorly about anyone else, it is being...well, mean. There is no good will and no kindness in it. It is ugly. There is no holiness, no love. To use Paul's phrase in Ephesians 4:29, it is a "rotten word." It comes from pride and one-upmanship and anger and resentment -- and it is all very sinful. That's why you need to watch it, lest you become accustomed to your sin and stop noticing it.

For me, this lesson taught me the truth of Ephesians 4:22-24: You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; 23 to be made new in the attitude of your minds; 24 and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.


In the end the battle for purity in the mouth is fought in the heart, because "out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks." If you don't like what comes out of your mouth, listen carefully, because the apostle Paul says you need to watch your mouth from the inside out.

Let's look at verse 29. Paul uses the phrase "rotten word." The RSV translates it, "Let no evil talk come out of your mouths." The NIV and NASB use the word "unwholesome." And the KJV says, "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth." What is this idea behind the words, "evil," "unwholesome," and "corrupt"?

The Greek word (sapros) is used in only one other context in the NT, namely, the places in Matthew and Luke where Jesus says, "It is not the good tree that bears bad fruit "(Lk. 6:43; Mt. 7:17f; Mt. 12:33). The term for "bad" fruit here is the same word for evil or unwholesome or corrupt in Ephesians 4:29 -- "Let no evil talk come out of your mouth!" The image in Paul's mind is probably one of rottenness and decay, something that is spoiled.

This kind of rotten language must be taken off like old clothes. It is part of the old self of verse 22 that needs to be stripped away when a person becomes a Christian. Now what sort of talk does Paul have in mind when he says, "Let no rotten talk come out of your mouth"? John Piper gives us four types of rotten words that Jesus is referring to:

• "First would be language that takes the name of the Lord in vain. It is a great contradiction of who we are as Christians if we say, "God!" or "My God!" or "God Almighty!" or "Christ!" or "Jesus!" just because we are mad or surprised or amazed. No one with a good marriage would stomp on his wedding ring to express anger. It stands for something precious and pure. And so does the name of God and Jesus Christ.

• The second kind of language that Paul would call rotten would be language that trivializes terrible realities -- like hell and damnation and holiness. What's wrong with saying, "What the hell!" or "Hell, no" or "Go to hell!" or "Damn it!" or "Damn right!" or "Holy cow!" or "Holy mackeral!"? Among other things these expressions trivialize things of terrible seriousness. It's simply a contradiction to believe in the horrible reality of hell and use the word like a punctuation mark for emphasis when talking about sports or politics. The same is true of damnation. And if the divine command, "Be holy as I am holy," carries for you the same weight it carried for Moses and Jesus and the apostles, you will simply find that "Holy cow" or holy anything will stick in your throat because it treats something infinitely precious as a trifle.

• The third kind of language I think Paul would include in his command not to let any rotten talk come out of your mouth is vulgar references to sex and the human body. With this kind of language people take good things that God has made, and use them like mud to smear on whatever they get upset about. The whole assumption behind the use of vulgar four-letter words is that they communicate scorn or disdain or hate. How does this happen? How, for example, does the act of sexual relations, created by God as good to be fulfilled in marriage -- how does it get translated into a four letter word and carry the meaning of hate and scorn? The answer is easy: first you get God out of your mind. That's fundamental to all vulgarity. Then you get the sanctity of his creation out of your mind. And then, in your mind, you replace the tenderness of married love with the force of rape, and you've got yourself four letter word which does verbally the same thing that rape does physically: it expresses selfish, uncaring abusiveness. (Which, incidentally, is why I would say to Christian women, don't spend two minutes with a man who uses this kind of language: rape and rotten language come from exactly the same root.)

• The final kind of language I think Paul would call rotten is mean-spirited language -- like, "Shut up!" The words themselves are untarnished. But the usage is vicious and loveless.

Those are the four kinds of language, I think Paul would include in "rotten talk". Now let's step back and ask what Paul might mean by calling language evil or corrupt or unwholesome or rotten. If we think of spoiled or rotten fruit, like Jesus did, four implications come to mind.

• First, rotten fruit does not nourish. Neither does rotten language. It does not strengthen or improve or help. It is not useful for food. It is good for nothing but to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.
• Second, rotten fruit will probably make you sick if you do try to eat it. And rotten language can make people sick, too. In other words, it not only fails to give positive nourishment, it can cause negative harm. Words can wound a person very deeply. Words can be like the virus that transmits the disease of meanness or vulgarity from parent to child or roommate to roommate or colleague to colleague. Rotten language makes people sick if they are forced to eat it.
• Third, rotten fruit smells bad and makes the atmosphere unpleasant. I recall a couple of men in graduate school in Germany who seemed to carry the aroma of vulgarity about them. All they ever seemed to laugh at was sexual innuendo. The pitiful thing about it was that the nearer they got to the gutter the more they laughed. With their mouths they created an atmosphere like a stinking locker room. It was unpleasant for everybody but themselves. And it made noble and high and worthy thoughts all but impossible. It's hard to savor beauty from a garbage dump. Can you stand in an "adult" bookstore and look through the window (if there were a window) and be moved by the beauty of a setting sun?
• The fourth implication that comes to mind when we think of rotten fruit and rotten language is that it probably comes from a diseased tree. If the fruit is rotten as soon as it appears on the branch (as soon as the words come out of the mouth) then the tree is bad.

Jesus said, "Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man out of his good treasure brings forth good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure brings forth evil. I tell you, on the day of judgment men will render account for every careless word they utter; for by your words you will be justified and by your words you will be condemned" (Mt. 12:34-37).

So if a person takes the name of God in vain, or trivializes the realities of hell and holiness, or turns sexuality into vulgarity, or makes words into weapons of one-up-manship and meanness, then we can say for sure, "There is a rottenness inside the tree as well as outside." If the fruit is bad the root is bad. "

The question for your mouth will not merely be the moral question: Am I avoiding dirty words? But the Christian question: Am I building the faith of others by what I say? Is my mouth a means of grace? Am I frightened and anxious and angry about my life, or am I filled and overflowing with hope that the Spirit of God will keep me safe for the day of redemption?

100 Things About Jesus Everyone Should Know

I was doing some research and deveotional readings this evening and came across this list.  I found it interesting and helpful.  I hope you do too!  Enjoy...
1) Jesus claimed to be God - John 8:24; 8:56-59 (see Exodus 3:14); John 10:30-33

2) Jesus created all things - John 1:3; Col. 1:15-17

3) Jesus is before all things - Col. 1:17

4) Jesus is eternal - John 1:1,14 ; 8:58

5) Jesus is honored the same as the Father - John 5:23

6) Jesus is prayed to - Acts 7:55-60

7) Jesus is worshipped - Matt. 2:2,11; 14:33; John 9:35-38; Heb. 1:6

8) Jesus is called God - John 1:1,14; 20:28; Col. 2:9; Titus 2:13

9) Jesus is omnipresent - Matt. 28:20

10 Jesus is with us always - Matt. 28:20


11) Jesus is our only mediator between God and ourselves - 1 Tim. 2:5

12) Jesus is the guarantee of a better covenant - Heb. 7:22; 8:6

13) Jesus said, "I AM the Bread of Life" - John 6:35,41,48,51

14) Jesus said, "I AM the Door" - John 10:7,9

15) Jesus said, "I AM the Good Shepherd" - John 10:11,14

16) Jesus said, "I AM the Way the Truth and The Life" - John 14:6

17) Jesus said, "I AM the Light of the world" - John 8:12; 9:5; 12:46; Luke 2:32

18) Jesus said, "I AM the True Vine" - John 15:1,5

19) Jesus said, "I AM the Resurrection and the Life" - John 11:25

20) Jesus said, "I AM the First and the Last" - Rev. 1:17; 2:8; 22:13


21) Jesus always lives to make intercession for us - Heb. 7:25

22) Jesus cleanses from sin - 1 John 1:9

23) Jesus discloses Himself to us - John 14:21

24) Jesus draws all men to Himself - John 12:32

25) Jesus forgives sins - Matt. 9:1-7; Luke 5:20; 7:48

26) Jesus gives eternal life - John 10:28; 5:40

27) Jesus gives joy - John 15:11

28) Jesus gives peace - John 14:27

29) Jesus has authority - Matt. 28:18; John 5:26-27; 17:2; 3:35

30) Jesus judges - John 5:22,27


31) Jesus knows all men - John 16:30

32) Jesus opens the mind to understand scripture - Luke 24:45

33) Jesus received honor and glory from the Father - 1 Pet. 1:17

34) Jesus resurrects - John 5:39; 6:40,44,54; 11:25-26

35) Jesus reveals grace and truth - John 1:17 see John 6:45

36) Jesus reveals the Father - Matt. 11:27; Luke 10:22

37) Jesus saves forever - Matt. 18:11; John 10:28; Heb. 7:25

38) Jesus bears witness of Himself - John 8:18; 14:6

39) Jesus' works bear witness of Himself - John 5:36; 10:25

40) The Father bears witness of Jesus - John 5:37; 8:18; 1 John 5:9


41) The Holy Spirit bears witness of Jesus - John 15:26

42) The multitudes bear witness of Jesus - John 12:17

43) The Prophets bear witness of Jesus - Acts 10:43

44) The Scriptures bear witness of Jesus - John 5:39

45) The Father will honor us if we serve Jesus - John 12:26 see Col. 3:24

46) The Father wants us to fellowship with Jesus - 1 Cor. 1:9

47) The Father tells us to listen to Jesus - Luke 9:35; Matt. 17:5

48) The Father tells us to come to Jesus - John 6:45

49) The Father draws us to Jesus - John 6:44

50) Everyone who's heard & learned from the Father comes to Jesus - John 6:45


51) The Law leads us to Christ - Gal. 3:24

52) Jesus is the Rock - 1 Cor. 10:4

53) Jesus is the Savior - John 4:42; 1 John 4:14

54) Jesus is King - Matt. 2:1-6; Luke 23:3

55) In Jesus are the treasures of wisdom and knowledge - Col. 2:2-3

56) In Jesus we have been made complete Col. 2:10

57) Jesus indwells us - Col. 1:27

58) Jesus sanctifies - Heb. 2:11

59) Jesus loves - Eph. 5:25

60) We come to Jesus - John 5:50; 6:35,37,45,65; 7:37;


61) We sin against Jesus - 1 Cor. 8:12

62) We receive Jesus - John 1:12; Col. 2:6

63) Jesus makes many righteous - Rom. 5:19

64) Jesus is the image of the invisible God - Heb. 1:3

65) Jesus sends the Holy Spirit - John 15:26

66) Jesus abides forever - Heb. 7:24

67) Jesus offered up Himself - Heb. 7:27; 9:14

68) Jesus offered one sacrifice for sins for all time - Heb. 10:12

69) The Son of God has given us understanding - 1 John 5:20

70) Jesus is the author and perfecter of our faith - Heb. 12:2

71) Jesus is the Apostle and High Priest of our confession - Heb. 1:3

72) Jesus is preparing a place for us in heaven - John 14:1-4

73) Jesus cleanses us from our sins by His blood - Rev. 1:5; Rom. 5:9

74) Jesus is the Light of the world - Rom. 9:5

75) Jesus has explained the Father - John 1:18

76) Jesus was crucified because of weakness - 2 Cor. 13:4

77) Jesus has overcome the world - John 16:33

78) Truth is in Jesus - Eph. 4:21

79) The fruit of righteousness comes through Jesus Christ - Phil. 1:11

80) Jesus delivers us from the wrath to come - 1 Thess. 1:10

81) Disciples bear witness of Jesus Christ - John 15:27

82) Jesus died and rose again - 1 Thess. 4:14

83) The Christian dead have fallen asleep in Jesus - 1 Thess. 4:15

84) Jesus died for us - 1 Thess. 5:10

85) Jesus tasted death for everyone - Heb. 2:9

86) Jesus rendered the devil powerless - Heb. 2:14

87) Jesus is able to save completely - Heb. 7:25

88) Jesus was a ransom for many and to serve - Matt. 20:28

89) Jesus came to be a high priest - Heb. 2:17

90) Jesus came to save - John 3:17; Luke 19:10


91) Jesus came to preach the kingdom of God - Luke 4:43

92) Jesus came to bring division - Luke 12:51

93) Jesus came to do the will of the Father - John 6:38

94) Jesus came to give the Father's words - John 17:8

95) Jesus came to testify to the truth - John 18:37

96) Jesus came to die and destroy Satan's power - Heb. 2:14

97) Jesus came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets - Matt. 5:17

98) Jesus came to give life - John 10:10,28

99) Jesus came to taste death for everyone - Heb. 2:9

100) Jesus came to proclaim freedom for believers - Luke 4:18

Authority and Inspiration of the Bible

I first wrote this paper in April 2008 for a Hermeneutics class.  Its awesome to look back 4 years and see ways in which I have grown in Spiritual Maturity.  I may write this paper a little differently today, but I would still come to the same conclusion.  Enjoy...

My opinion on the authority and inspiration of scripture is best summed up in John 10:35, where Jesus not only uses the words of scripture to refute the religious leaders of His day, but he goes on to declare that “scripture cannot be broken”. We all have used 2 Tim 3:16 to claim and assert that the Bible is inspired and authoritative, but is it possible to delve deeper into this understanding and determine why? Having surveyed the views on the authority of scripture, and coming to a better understanding of the liberal, evangelical and fundamental positions, I find that my inclinations are towards a fundamentalist approach to authority and inspiration, with some slight modifications. However, I do feel that the Bible is both infallible and inerrant simultaneously without the need to feel contradicted.

In his book, Inspiration and Authority, Achtemeier presents very well not only a summary view of the 3 major positions, but also the presentation of his own personal view as an evangelical. In summary of his reading, we see that he contends for a Bible reading where scripture is infallible, yet where room exists for errancy in matters not related to faith, or where history and/or science is related. I disagree with the second position stated and will come back to address.

I do agree with his position on inspiration as a 3 part process: scripture as a witness to itself, the relationship with the faith community, and with regards to the formation of canon. (Achtemeier, 91-92) I believe that scripture to be inspired is a process. I do not necessarily feel that this indicates that the Spirit performs direct revelation to the writer, or that the Bible is verbatim the given word of God. The process of rewriting, borrowing, altering events, under guidance and inspiration of the Spirit is all part of the inspiration process. It is this process that allows scripture to contain the internal testimony of the Spirit without which the Bible would be no different than any other period literature book. (Achtemeier, 122-123)

However, I disagree that because of the presence of the Holy Spirit, and it’s internal testimony, that we can separate the need for accuracy due to the deeper meaning of the text. How can the meaning be correct but the content be inaccurate? This is where I split with the evangelical view as presented. (Achtemeier, 124) Furthermore, the act of separating the infallible message with the potentially inaccurate word could ultimately lead to a type of Biblical docetism (Sproul, 83) whereby we receive the infallible message of the Bible through the ability to err of the writer. Furthermore, I cannot agree with Achtemeier’s view that since inspiration is inerrant and inspiration ceased with the original Bible writers, then anything that a current writer could add would only be an errant distraction. (Achtemeier, 127) I think this is based on a particular understanding of the word inerrant. This will be addressed shortly.

Just for the sake of presenting the third option listed, I cannot understand or comprehend the liberal position that the Bible is not inspired, but rather contains revelations, based on subjective and inductive understandings. For example, Rudolph Bultmann in his book Kerygma and Myth, declares that the proclamation of the Gospels is myth, based on mythical ancient understandings. For instance, the notion that we live in a 3 tiered universe; Heaven above, Hell below and Earth in the middle is a mythical notion that we moderns should not have to accept. We “moderns” know that there is nothing below the earth or above the skies from an empirical standpoint. Therefore, we can throw that out of our understanding. (Bultmann, website) What matters is that Jesus lives and is the Son of God, and we must have faith in Him alone and all will be well. But, this understanding alone cannot be. All of our sacred Creeds: Nicene, Apostles’, etc are based in scripture. (Bruce, website) Additionally, scripture reflects the character of God and Jesus, and serves as a pattern for us to follow. (Bruce, website) Should all this be thrown out? Furthermore, the books of the NT were not deemed inspired and authoritative because they were included in Canon; rather they were included in Canon because they were already revered and deemed to be inspired and authoritative by the earliest church fathers. (Bruce, website)

I personally have always believed that the Bible is the inspired, infallible and inerrant, authoritative word of God. Not that it is a substitute for faith in Jesus Christ, because ultimately that is where justification and salvation come from. But having this high view of scripture, I have not been comfortable with the ability for some to take portions of scripture and remove them, thereby reducing canon. (Sproul, 34) I struggle with this for many reasons, not the least of which are the multiple passages of scripture that attest to the infallibility and inerrancy of scripture. Passages that speak in favor of the inerrancy and infallibility in the Word include 2 Cor 4:3-6, 1 John 1:10, 2 Tim 3:16, John 10:35 to name a few. But most importantly to me is John 3:12, Jesus rebukes Nicodemus for not believing him on earthly things. How do we then say the Bible can err? In his book Scripture Alone, RC Sproul takes this a step further. For if we claim that God is inerrant, then how can we claim that writers under the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit be guided into error? (Sproul, 85)

I believe this is due to a lack of understanding the terms infallible and inerrant, which in my humble opinion cannot be separated. EJ Young defines infallibility as meaning that the Bible has an indefectible authority that cannot be broken. It has absolute authority and cannot be contradicted in anyway. It is incapable of proving false or erroneous. (Sproul, 88) Furthermore, Hans Kuhn adds that the notion of something infallible connotes that something cannot deceive or mislead. (Sproul, 88) As we turn to the term inerrant, we define this word as meaning that it is free from error, incapable of being wrong, perfect in it’s teaching of the truth. By using these definitions and relationship between the words, how then can the words be separated with regards to scripture? By using the words as defined, and declaring scripture as infallible and inerrant, we are simply stating that scripture is true. Now if we can declare scripture is true, then how can anybody simultaneously believe that scripture contains deceit? I cannot make this connection. I don’t believe the Bible to be inerrant and infallible based on the ability of the human author; but rather because our belief is in the integrity of Jesus Christ as the Son of God. (Sproul, 86)

While faith in the Word is the ultimate duty and identification of a Christian, it is not the only response, or defense, as to the declaration of scripture as inerrant and infallible. Many methods exist in which one can verify the objective position that is desired; these include the Confessional Method, the Classical Method and the Presuppositional Method to name a few. (Sproul, 64-67) I feel that the Classical Method best describes my position and justification of the inerrancy and infallibility of scripture.


The Classical Method rests on 4 premises:

A. The Bible is the infallible word of God.

B. The Bible attests to its own infallibility.

C. The self-attestation of scripture is an infallible attestation.

Conclusion: The Bible is the infallible Word of God.

(Sproul, 69)

If we analyze a moment what this says, it becomes clear that this is not a circular or self-fulfilling logic. The premise presents scripture in a light that begins with the general truthfulness of scripture and ends with the declarations of the inerrancy or infallibility of scripture. The following presentation provided by RC Sproul builds upon this method in this manner:

A. The Bible is a reliable and trustworthy document.

B. On the basis of this document we have enough evidence to believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

C. Jesus Christ, God’s Son, is an infallible authority.

D. Jesus Christ teaches that the Bible is beyond question and is the very word of God.

E. Because God is infallible and trustworthy, so to is His Word.

Conclusions: On the basis of the infallibility and authority of Jesus Christ, the church must believe the Bible to be infallible and trustworthy. (Sproul, 73)

In summary, the limitations of the paper cannot begin to do justice to the topic at hand. In my opinion, the Bible is the inspired, inerrant and infallible word of God. It must be the normative pattern for the Christian church to follow. Personally, I do not believe the Bible was a dictation, or that men served as scriveners for God writing word for word the message. The Bible has certainly been rewritten in parts, and assuredly the authors of the Bible used resources available to them in their day to write their message; whether common books, songs, traditions, etc, to best communicate the message laid on their heart through the inspiration of the Spirit. I believe strongly that the Spirit was the inspiring force in and through scripture that guided the writers into the message they were ultimately to communicate. Placement of a story in chronology, a set period of time, a scientific event, these were all written under divine inspiration and there to communicate to us a message that we are to receive under the illumination of the Spirit; these are not wrong, or errors, for as we discussed in class there are no errors in the Bible. To reduce canon, or mythologize scripture, or claim infallibility over inerrancy, in my opinion flies in the face of what scripture says about itself. I will end this brief paper with a passage, a warning, from John as he closed the Book of Revelation with a warning, and hence a warning now for all scripture in canon, with these words:

I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book. Rev 22:18-19

Bibliography

Achtemeier, Paul J. Inspiration and Authority
Peabody, MA.; Hendrickson Publishers, 1999

Bruce, FF. The New Testament Documents: Are they reliable?
www.earlychrisitianwriting.com; published 1943

Bultmann, Rudolph. Kerygma and Myth
www.earlychrisitanwriting.com; published 1953

Sproul, RC. Scripture Alone- The Evangelical Doctrine
Philipsburg, NJ; P&R Publishing, 2005

Martin Luther's Verse

Lots of people associate Ephesians 2:8-9 as the classic "Luther Verse". However, it was Romans 1:16-17 that actually sparked the flame in Luther's heart that eventually led him to proclaim that salvation came through faith alone-Sola Fide!! Here is that verse:

For I am not ashamed of the Gospel; it is the power of God for salvation for everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith, for faith; as it is written, "The one who is righteous will live by faith." Romans 1:16-17

The Four Temperaments and Biblical Personalities

Ever wonder what your personality is like through the lens of Scripture?  Well this is a great little outline that I picked up during my class on Spiritual Development, with one of my favorite professor's of all time, Dr. David Oliver.  So, are you Sanguine? Melancholy? Choleric? Phlegmatic?  Read on and find out.  Hope you enjoy it!!

1. Sanguine-- ATrust me! It'll work out!

Proverbs 15:13 "A happy heart make the face cheerful, but heartache crushes the spirit."

Proverbs 15:15 "All the days of the oppressed are wretched, but the cheerful heart has a continual

feast."

Jesus enjoyed eating and drinking with friends and sinners and telling parables.

Peter--ATrust Me type.  He was very dramatic, often speaking up for the rest of the disciples. Sometimes he spoke before thinking. One moment, in front of the crowd, he promises to never forsake Christ. A while later he denied even knowing the Lord. He was probably sanguine and choleric.

John Mark--started well but then quit (Acts 15:37-39).

King David, Samson, Barnabas, Mary (Martha's Sister-probably sanguine/phlegmatic, people oriented, somewhat passive). Ruth showed sanguine behavior when she enticed Naomi to let her travel with her. She demonstrated family loyalty and an adventurous spirit by her willingness to move to a foreign country (probably sanguine/phlegmatic).

Many evangelists are sanguine.



2. Melancholy-- How was it done in the past?

Proverbs 27:12 The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and suffer for

it.

Jesus taught the lost about the kingdom of God.


Moses--A Do it Right kind of guy. Wanted to know the details of how God was going to help him lead the people out of Egypt. Attentive to the details of the Law given by God and the precise measurements of the temple. Probably Moses was a melancholy/phlegmatic. He seemed unsure of himself and tried to convince God to make his brother Aaron a leader.

Apollos--Acts 18:24-28 Probably melancholy and choleric.

Mary, the Mother of Jesus--Analytical: She wondered what sort of greeting this might be. Luke 2: 19 "Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart." Be it done unto me according to all you have said.  Likely melancholy/phlegmatic.

Judas Iscariot, Joseph (O.T.), Thomas--he doubted Christ's resurrection. Jesus gave him the evidence Thomas needed to believe. Esther the Queen was willing to comply with the rules and requirements of her position. Yet, when it became necessary to bend the rules, she wanted to make sure that it was done correctly. She planned very carefully and prayerfully and was systematic in her approach to problem solving.

Many teachers and intercessors have melancholy personalities.

3. Choleric-- Let's do it now!

Galatians 1:10 Am I now seeking human approval, or God's approval? Or am I trying to please

people? If I were still pleasing people, I would not be a servant of Christ.

Proverbs 11:14 For lack of guidance a nation falls, but many advisers make victory sure. This

text provides corrective guidance for the choleric temperaments who believe they are right

about most things.

Jesus argued with the scribes and pharisees about the Law.

Paul--A Do it Now! temperament.  He was left for dead, imprisoned, stoned, forsaken and forgotten, yet he pressed on toward the high calling of God.

Elijah stood against the priests of Baal.

Joshua, Rebekah, Priscilla, John the Baptist, Martha

Many apostles/prophets are Choleric.


4. Phlegmatic-- Let's keep things the way they are!

Proverbs 15:1 "A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger."

Proverbs 15:18 "A hot-tempered man stirs up dissension, but a patient man calms a quarrel.

Jesus spoke to the deepest needs of the woman at the well and the woman caught in adultery.

Barnabas--probably phlegmatic and sanguine, Acts 15:37-39.

Nehemiah--AStatus Quo and Consensus builder, good administrative skills to accomplish a task.

Isaac, Joseph (N.T.), Hannah--she was submissive and remained faithful, even though her dreams were not fulfilled. She may have appeared  unstable  when she prayed in the temple. Her reaction after she prayed shows she was very stable.

Many pastors and intercessors are phlegmatic.

Mark 9:36-37

Then He(Jesus) took a little child and put it among them; and taking it in His arms He said to them, "Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me."

Time Flies

Wow...I cannot believe it has been nearly two months since my last entry.  This summer has been an absolute whirlwind.  Since June 2nd, we have:

• Wrapped Dale's baseball season
• Wrapped up Sally's softball season
• Went to ALIVE Fest
• Put on two 180 Summer Nights
• Can Do Soccer Camp
• First annual 180 Summer Spectacular
• Went to Charlotte, NC for some training

And I am sure there is more that I am not remember right now.  But God is good and this summer, with it's ups and downs, has been a tremendous blessing and time of growth.  Needless to say, I do not want to neglect my blog like that anymore!!  So, I think I am going to take a new approach to my blogging.  Generally, I have reserved my blogs for larger entries, like ideas for sermons or papers.  I'm still going to keep doing that from regularly, but I think I am going to use it more to just post thoughts that I find interesting or cool snippets of items that I come across.  So that said, let us begin now...

I'm reading this book called "Contours in Christology in the New Testament" with Longenecker as the G.E.  I and reading the section on the Christology in Mark, and came across this cool bit of information on the early hymns used and found in the New Testament: 

"The most obvious early Christian hymns in praise of God are those found in Rom 11:33-36 and Rev 15:3b-4. The most commonly accepted early Christian hymns extolling Christ are Phil 2:6-11; 1 Tim 3:16b; and 1 Pet 2:22-23"

How interesting is that?  Hymns of praise used by the Apostles in their writing of the scriptures. Kind of puts a new perspective on singing hymns of praise during our worship on Sunday mornings, right?

Be blessed!!