‘The Gospel’ According to Romans 1:16

Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 28th Edition
Οὐ γὰρ ἐπαισχύνομαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, δύναμις γὰρ θεοῦ ἐστιν εἰς σωτηρίαν παντὶ τῷ πιστεύοντι, Ἰουδαίῳ τε πρῶτον καὶ Ἕλληνι.

New International Version
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.

New Living Translation
For I am not ashamed of this Good News about Christ. It is the power of God at work, saving everyone who believes—the Jew first and also the Gentile.

English Standard Version
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

King James Bible
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

NASB 1995
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

Christian Standard Bible
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, first to the Jew, and also to the Greek.

NET Bible
For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is God's power for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

New Revised Standard Version
For I am not ashamed of the gospel; it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

A Church Called Love (Part 2): What is love?

definitions are tricky

If I say I hate asparagus, pretty much everyone knows what I mean. It means I really don't like it (which is absolutely true). Now watch what happens when I switch out asparagus for something else. If I say I hate Eric, pretty much everyone knows what I mean then, too. And pretty much everyone would agree that I don’t mean the same thing as when I said I hated asparagus. Why’s that? The same word was used. Even my tone (which can’t be captured here) could have remained the same and you would still understand the second usage of hate as something quite a bit stronger than the first. This works with love, as well.

I love my wife. And by that I mean that I have chosen to happily and without hesitation lay down my life for her. To which you, after reading that sentence, would probably be totally fine with that usage of love. What do I mean, though, when I say that I love roller coasters? Hopefully not the same thing as when I said I love my wife. Further, what do I mean when I say I love God?

What do we find if we turn to the dictionary (which, just to make sure there isn’t any confusion, I think is a good idea) for a definition of love? Several options.

an intense feeling of deep affection
a great interest or pleasure in something
a warm attachment, enthusiasm, or devotion
a score of zero

Feelings, pleasure, attachment, enthusiasm, devotion. All these definitions give us a sense of what love can mean, but none of them paint the entire picture. Love can mean you’re totally devoted to a person or it could mean you’re about to lose a game of tennis. I can say I love my wife and I love roller coasters and mean different things, because definitions are tricky.

context is king

What do we do when we can’t figure out what a word means in the Bible? A word study, of course!

Whether or not someone knows Greek (the language in which the New Testament was originally written), they probably know that ἀγάπη (agape) is a Greek word for love. And they probably know it’s used a lot in the New Testament. For instance, Paul uses it (and the verb cognate, ἀγαπάω (agapao)) 9-times in 13-verses in 1 Corinthians 13. (There’s another word for love in the New Testament, φίλος (philos)/φιλέω (phileo), but it is not used as often as agape. The tricky thing with philos/phileo is that it can sometimes mean friend, or even kiss.)

Defining words is not easy and defining an often used word like love is no different. In some places, like John 3:35, the definition seems pretty much self-evident. There the apostle writes, “The Father loves (agapao) the Son and has given all things into his hand.” One of the things I love about John is how he likes to use different words to mean the same thing. Later, in chapter 5, he writes almost exactly the same thing, but this time uses the Greek word phileo for love instead of agapao: “For the Father loves (phileo) the Son and shows him all that he himself is doing.” (If you’d like to look into this feature of John’s writing further, check out John 21:15-17.)

Moving out from the New Testament, but using the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint, LXX), we could look at a verse like 2 Samuel 13:1, which reads: “Now Absalom, David’s son, had a beautiful sister, whose name was Tamar. And after a time, Amnon, David’s son, loved (egapesen) her.” If you know this story, you might be a little concerned with the usage of the word love here, because what happens next is nothing short of horrific. Amnon takes Tamar and humiliates her because, as the text says, the love he had for her overcame him. And, less we think that there is something odd going on here with the English translation, the Greek translators of the Old Testament chose to use the word (egapesen), which is a form of the word (agapao). The same word used by the Apostle John for the love the Father has for the Son. Depending on the context—even in Greek—one word can mean something positive and true, and in another sense something twisted and dark.

We’ve arrived at the familiar conclusion that, even with an original language study, it’s context that drives the definition of love, because context is king.

LOVE IS OTHERS-FOCUSED

So, here we are once more at the question driving this article: What is love? We can continue to give thanks to God for the Apostle Paul, because he lays out some very helpful characteristics of love for us in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 as he writes:

Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude.

It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.

Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.

A couple things to note here right off the bat. First, this is almost certainly not an exhaustive list of characteristics for love. Second, this list can be divided up into two main categories: what love is/does, and what love is not/does not do.

Love is/does: patient, kind, rejoices with the truth, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things.

Love is not/does not: envy, boast, arrogant, rude, insist on its own way, irritable or resentful, rejoice at wrongdoing.

When we further stare at these characteristics of love, it becomes clear that one group focuses on others and the second focuses on the self. Those without love have little to no care for anyone other than themselves. They make much of themselves, and they’re rude when they do it. Instead of backing up and allowing someone else to lead, they insist that their way is best. God forbid they don’t get their own way, because they’re irritable and resentful. This, then, manifests itself into the tragedy of rejoicing when evil befalls others. Someone without love has become a person who has turned in on themselves, and to turn love around so that it is focused back on ourselves, is little more than the age-old idolatry of Genesis 3. I should make something clear here before going forward. Saying this is not the same thing as saying we ought not to care for ourselves or think we’re worthwhile as human beings. It’s exactly the opposite. Far from a call to think we’re worthless, it’s a call for us to love the God who loves us more than anyone else in the universe has or ever could. And, thus, gladly receive the love he has for us. This is the essence of true self-worth.

On the flip side, someone with love is patient and kind. They believe that another person’s time is just as important, or even more important than theirs. Those with love are kind to other people. They rejoice with the truth they find in the world. They bear, believe, hope, and endure in all circumstances. Someone with love lives their life in such a way as to see others (God and their neighbors) as the worthy recipients of their love. They are others-focused, because love is others-focused.

the embodiment of love

After the Israelites were freed from their 400-years of unjust captivity and forced labor in Egypt they found themselves on the edge of the Promised Land. An entire generation had died, but here they were, about to step into what God had been calling them to for 40-years. But…there was a problem; a big problem. They had become a forgetful bunch, who didn’t always trust the one who rescued them. So Moses exhorts them to remember their calling into a life intimately connected to God; to remember what it’s like to be the people of God in a world who doesn’t know him. And he does this by reminding them of who they are, and whose they are.

It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the Lord set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples, but it is because the Lord loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers, that the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. (Dt. 7:7-8, ESV)

Lest any of the ancient Israelites of Moses’s day think that they were God’s people because they were great in number, he reminds them that they were actually the fewest of all peoples. In other words, they were not God’s people because of who they intrinsically were—a large collection of wanderers—they were God’s people because, as Moses says, “the Lord set his love on you and chose you.” There goes all their boasting in anyone but God. There goes all their reliance upon anyone but God. And there goes all their reception of self-worth from anyone that would say anything different than what God has already said. The Lord set his love on the ancient Israelites because he “loves you and is keeping the oath that he swore to your fathers.” The ancient Israelites were loved by God because that’s who God was, and that’s who he continues to be today.

Fast-forwarding a few thousand-years, we find a similar thing being said about God and Christ from the Apostle Paul.

…but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Ro. 5:8, ESV)

Can you imagine doing this for someone who was dead set against you? How about someone who had made it their life’s mission to discredit everything about you? How about someone who tried to destroy all you made? I can’t. But this was the exact situation God was in. He had reached out to a world he made with his hands—to a people he crafted individually—and he was met with a resounding, NO! So, what did he do? He decided it was best to step down into the world, live among his creation, teach them what it meant to be truly human, and then allow them to put him to death in the most horrific way possible at the time. While we were still going after anything but God, Jesus—the second person of the triune God—-gave up his life for us. Why did he do this? To show his love.

Understanding love is not merely to ascend to an appropriate definitional standard. Love is much more real and solid than that; it’s much more complex than that. In the end, love is a person. And that person, who is the embodiment of God, is by definition the embodiment of love.

a story about jesus

So, what would you say to friend who asked you to define love? Are you going to Google “What is love?” and then read off the first few definitions, putting together a definition of your own? At least you’d be doing some research. Maybe you do a word-study throughout the Bible? That’s not bad, either. You’ll get a lot of useful material. You might, though, just flip open your Bible to 1 Corinthians 13 and read aloud.

You could do any of those or none of them. One other thing you could do, though (which I think Paul would gladly approve of), is to read through the gospels until you know them like the back of your hand and then tell your friend a story about Jesus. The Jesus who preached to his followers about what it meant to be a part of the kingdom of God. The Jesus who didn’t turn away children, but warned those who did and would. The Jesus who confronted some of the religious leaders of his day who sought to control people instead of showing them God. The Jesus who healed people who trusted him. The Jesus who wept over Jerusalem before heading in to be crucified. The Jesus who resurrected, ascended, and sent the Spirit of God to minister to us as we live our lives.

To define love, just tell a story about Jesus.

A Walkthrough of Romans 8: Verse 4

Why has the Father sent his Son to do what the weakened law could not do? Paul tells us in verse 4.

“in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.” (Rom. 8:4, NIV)

The law (or probably better, instruction or regulation) of God was not bad; it was corrupted and weakened by sin. Specifically, the sin was that those who agreed to it decided they were better off ignoring the instruction given by Yahweh, and decided they could be god for themselves. It was idolatry through and through.

And, as it always has and always will, idolatry did not lead the Israelites into life, but death.

As we’ve seen, though, through the first three verses of Romans 8, God did not leave his people to their own folly. As difficult as it is to believe, he actually condemned the sin they so horrifically loved, instead of condemning them in it. And, in verse 4, Paul tells us that God id this so that the δικαίωμα (righteous or just) requirements of God’s law would be fulfilled.

Not just filled, however, in the plain, general sense. Fulfilled in those who do not περιπατοῦσιν (walk or live) according to the flesh, but who walk or live according to the Spirit.

You can see the picture Paul is painting with this section of his letter to the Romans. In just four verses, Paul is showing them (and us) that real and true freedom is found in Jesus through the work of the Spirit of God in our lives. We can trust that this is true because: “The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing” (Jn. 6:63a, NIV).

With all that, why in the world would you and I try to live any other way? Because you and I are not so different from those ancient Israelites who lived thousands of years ago. Sure, we don’t eat like them, talk like them, or even dress like them. But, if there’s one thing we have in common with our fellow humans of old it’s that we love to make gods out of anything or anyone other than the triune God of the Scriptures.

The good news, though…this triune God of the Scriptures has done something about our unwillingness—more than that, our inability—to trust him. He has given us of himself, through the Spirit.

A Walkthrough of Romans 8: Verse 2

One of the most helpful words in the English language is for (or because).

We love it for it helps establish grounding in a line of thought. Paul loved it, too. He especially loved it in Romans 8, where he used it—γὰρ (gar) in Greek—17 times. The first of which comes in verse 2.

“because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death.” (Rom. 8:2, NIV)

Paul had just said, in verse 1, that no condemnation remains for those who believe in Jesus. And now, in verse 2, he gives us the reason: they have been set free. But Paul doesn’t stop there; instead, he anticipates the questions to come from a statement like that—set free from what, and how?—and answers them for us. 

He says that the νόμος (the law, principle, instruction, or even power)—of the Spirit of life has set them free. Notice how the Spirit—the third person of the Trinity—is linked with life. Further, notice how Paul places the Spirit of life in opposition to the νόμος of sin and death.

In Paul’s worldview, which I take to be the worldview of Jesus in particular and Scripture as a whole, there is life and there is death. And, for those of us made in the image of God—all of humanity—we have a decision to make regarding our allegiance. Are we going to trust in that which gives life, or are we going to trust in that which can only give death?

Paul is writing to those who have chosen Jesus, even if they’re unclear as to how their choice of Jesus has given them life. He still wants them to know what’s true about them now: no condemnation remains for you as you are united to Jesus (v. 1), because the νόμος of Spirit of life has shattered the enslaving chains of the νόμος of sin and death.

A Walkthrough of Romans 8: Verse 1

Romans 8 begins like a bridge that connects a land of hopelessness to a land where only hope exists.

“Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 8:1, NIV).

As Paul states, however, this bridge to a land of hope can only be traveled by a certain person. A person who is found in someone greater than themselves. A person who is found in Jesus.

For this one who is found in Jesus, the condemning result of their past life as one defined by a separation from God—even a rejoicing in that separation—no longer exists. We must remember to think and process this statement based on what it says, not how we often feel or assume.

Note the language used by Paul. Put overly straight forward, it reads: “…now no condemnation in Christ Jesus.”

Paul did not say, just a little condemnation left. Nor did he say, no condemnation unless you mess up again. He didn’t even say, for right now there’s no condemnation. What he said was that condemnation no longer exists.

Accept that. Rest in it. Trust that Paul is telling you the truth with these words written almost 2,000 years ago.

The gospel that Paul believed in, and Jesus preached, is such that for the person and people who find themselves abiding in Jesus—living as he instructs, viewing the world through his eyes, and loving like he did—any penalty that was once due to them because of their sin and idolatry before God, has been done away with.

To talk of condemnation in relationship to the person found in Jesus is a nonsensical topic. Paul wouldn’t understand what you mean.

We must ground ourselves in what Paul has said, not what the world offers as acceptable. And grounding ourselves in what Paul has said is believing that the hopeless of condemnation has been put away for the hope of a real life in Jesus.

Meditations for Communion: Jesus is Lord

In the ancient Roman-ruled world, there was a short two-word “confession of faith” that was required to be said by those living under Roman rule…if they wanted to stay in the good graces of Rome.

That short “confession of faith” was: Καῖσαρ κύριος (Kaisar kyrios)—Caesar is Lord. 

By saying Καῖσαρ κύριος, a person was doing at least two things: 1) they were doing what needed to be done to say in line with what Rome (Caesar) demanded from its people, and 2) they were making it clear to whom their allegiance belonged.

To be a good Roman citizen was to be a person who submitted to the authority of the state above all else. Rome was the one in charge. Sure, you could believe what you wanted and do what you wanted (on the side, and within limit), but there was no mistaking who made the rules. And there was certainly no mistaking who held those accountable for breaking those rules.

There was a type person (better, a whole group of people), though, for whom declaring Καῖσαρ κύριος would not do.

Those were the ancient Christians.

For them, there was someone they worshipped as Lord, but Caesar (and, thus, Rome) was not it. The ancient Christians had already settled on their “confession of faith” and it was: Ἰησοῦς κύριος (Iēsous kyrious)—Jesus is Lord.

This might not be clearer anywhere else in the New Testament than Paul’s letter to the Christians in Rome where he writes: “…if you confess with your mouth ‘Jesus is Lord’ (κύριον Ἰησοῦν) and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Rom. 10:9, LEB).

What hope was there for a Roman Christian in ancient early church?

It could be Rome, but Rome wasn’t going to truly save them. No, for the early church, Jesus was the only one who defeated death and, thus, could pass on that victory to those who testified to his death and resurrection.

And, so, they worshipped. And they testified. And they believed.

The ancient Christians did that then, and we can do that now—through communion.

Therefore, let us take of the cup and the bread together, and declare in the Lord’s Supper that, above all else: Ἰησοῦς κύριος—Jesus is Lord.

A Moment on the Scriptures: Who Wrote Romans?

The question of who actually wrote the Bible is one that comes up often, but rarely is it answered with the text of the Bible itself.

Now, it needs to be said that there’s nothing wrong with using historical linguistic or archaeological research into the writing habits of those in the first century or prior in order to determine how the books of the Bible came about. Plenty of good books and articles have been written on that topic, and we can be and are greatly helped by them. The question is, though, why not use the Bible as a primary resource to better understand how these collected writings came about?

Let’s look at the letter to the Romans as an example of how this might help us answer the question of authorship.

On the first page of the letter it’s clear who’s behind it: “Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God,” (Rom. 1:1, NASB). Who’s the one speaking to us from this letter? Clearly, Paul. He is the first person identified in the letter and his name is actually the first word of the letter. These are absolutely his words.

What do we see, though, when we get to the last sentences of the letter? In Romans 16:22 we read, “I, Tertius, who write this letter, greet you in the Lord.”

Who is Tertius, and what does he have to do with this letter? Well, according to the letter itself, he’s the one who wrote it.

This means that although the letter is rightly ascribed to Paul—as it’s his words, and his thoughts, and his theology—the one who wrote down those words, thoughts, and theology was not Paul—it was Tertius. And it’s right there in the text. There’s no mystery here. And neither is there any scandal. This is how, at least, the letter to the Romans came about.

Fun with Greek (2)

One little word in Greek (and, then, a few words in English—depending on the translation) makes all the difference for how we understand a believer’s relationship to sin.

In Romans, Paul is writing to Christians about a large number of things that all revolve around who Jesus was and is, and what he means for their lives and the world in which they live. Just about halfway through his letter (in what we call chapter 6), Paul starts to address the truth that someone in sin is not just messing around with sin but they are slaves of sin. In fact, Paul makes it clear that everyone at all times is either a slave of sin or righteousness.

To put it another way, a person either belongs to the world or to Jesus; they can’t belong to both at the same time.

I think Paul wrote that section of his letter not to discourage, but to encourage his readers. And his encouragement is found in the way he reminds them of what’s no longer true about them.

The cool thing for the purpose of this article is that Paul makes that point with one little Greek word: ἦτε (ēte). In Greek, ἦτε is what’s called an “imperfect indicative”. It’s a type of Greek verb that communicates something that happened in the past.

In Romans 6:17b, we read this in Greek: ἦτε δοῦλοι τῆς ἁμαρτίας. Roughly translated, it says, “Y’all were slaves of sin.”

“Y’all” because Paul wasn’t writing to just one person; he was writing to an entire body of believers. And, in finally getting to the point of this short article, “were” because those believers are no longer slaves of sin. This was Paul’s encouraging reminder to them.

In the past—before their lives were changed by Jesus and they decide to trust in him—it would have been wrong to say that they were slaves of sin, because they were still slaves of sin. But now, due to the work of God in their lives, this is no longer true, and Paul shows that this is no longer true of them by writing: ἦτε.

One little Greek word that makes all the difference.

Wise Words from C. S. Lewis

In 1945 the world knew full well the power of the atomic bomb, because it had been put on display. From that point on people lived with a new reality: a bomb could be dropped from the sky that could wipe an entire city from the face of the earth.

How does someone live with that sort of possibility in their life? How are you supposed to get up, go to work in morning, raise your family, celebrate a birthday, or mourn at a funeral when you don’t know if this is the day that bomb will drop?

Or, what about you and I and today? How are we supposed to live our lives in the age of annual epidemics and pandemics, natural disasters, political upheavals, and war?

Three years later, in 1948, that sort of question was offered up to C. S. Lewis, and this was part of his response.

“ ‘How are we to live in an atomic age?’ I am tempted to reply: Why as you would have lived in the sixteenth century when the plague visited London almost every year, or as you would have lived in a Viking age when raiders from Scandinavia might land and cut your throat in any night; or indeed, as you are already living in an age of cancer, or an age of syphilis, an age of paralysis, an age of air raids, an age of railway accidents, and age of motor accidents.

In other words, do not let us begin by exaggerating the novelty of our situation. Believe me, dear sir or madam, you and all whom you love were already sentenced to death before the atomic bomb was invented: and quite a high percentage of us were going to die in unpleasant ways.

This is the first point to be made: and the first action to be take is to pull ourselves together. If we are all going to be destroyed by an atomic bomb, let that bomb when it comes find us doing sensible and human things—praying, working, teaching, reading, listening to music, bathing our children, playing tennis, chatting to our friends over a pint and a game of darts—not huddled together like frightened sheep and thinking about bombs. They may break our bodies (a microbe can do that) but they need not dominate our minds.”

These are wise words from a wise Christian, which I commend to you for your consideration. And, although I don’t think I disagree with anything Lewis said in his response, I feel compelled to clarify or fill-out a couple of his points. Allow me to do so here.

1. Lewis said we have already been sentenced to death.
   This is true. Our corruption—due to the fall—is total and inescapable. “The compensation due sin is death” (Rom. 6:23a, LEB). However, because of what Jesus has done, death does not have the final say. Through his life, death, and resurrection, those who trust in him—although they will die—will live. “…but the gift of of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom. 6:23b, LEB). Death is real. But, in Jesus, life is realer.

2. Lewis said our first action is to pull ourselves together.
   He describes what that (pulling ourselves together) looks like: doing sensible and human things. Again, I don’t disagree, but I just want to point out that real humanity is found in connection with Jesus. There is only one true human who has ever lived and that was him. I expect that Lewis would amen this point and agree with the point that we must draw near to him and, in this drawing near, we are indeed pulling ourselves together. In that sense let us pray, work, teach, read, listen to music, bathe our children, play tennis, and chat to our friends over a pint and a game of darts. “…whether you eat or you drink or whatever you do, do all things for the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:31, LEB).

3. Lewis said he does not want us to be huddled together like frightened sheep.
   Amen to that! We have a good shepherd who’s job it is to look after his sheep, and his name Jesus. “I am the good shepherd, and I know my own, and my own know me, just as the Father knows me and I know the Father, and I lay down my life for the sheep. And I have other sheep which are not from this fold. I must bring these also, and they will hear my voice, and they will become one flock—one shepherd.” (John 10:14-16, LEB) Therefore, let us stand with confidence knowing that “whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord’s” (Romans 14:8b, LEB).

Exegetical Meditations (38)

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles. (Romans 1:22-23, NIV)

Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools.

Early in the letter to the Romans Paul makes the case that God’s wrath is being revealed in the world because mankind has suppressed the truth by their wickedness. Although Paul’s statement is shocking it’s not out of line, especially when one considers the storyline of the Scriptures. Nevertheless, he anticipates an objection he knows will be made that it’s unfair for God to reveal his wrath in the world. Specifically, because (it is assumed) he hasn’t made himself known. Paul knows this objection is coming and before it can make its stand he cuts it off at the knees by saying that “…what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them” (Romans 1:19).

All human beings everywhere know God enough for God to hold them accountable for their response to him. They know God enough because (contrary to the opinion of many) God has made himself known to them.

Why then, you might ask, didn’t all in Rome believe? If God has made himself known why is his wrath being revealed?

Because, even though God has made himself known, some of them decided to ignore him—to reject his own revelation of himself. They’ve said things like: it’s not good enough or we want more or that doesn’t make any sense. In other words, they wanted God’s own personal revelation not to be on his terms, but on theirs. They believed in themselves first and foremost and, therefore, they decided what revelation they would accept and what revelation they would reject. They did this because they trusted themselves. They trusted their feelings. They trusted in their own wisdom.

The problem is, Paul says that in their wisdom that brought them to denying and rejecting God, they have become fools.

And it didn’t end there.

Paul tells us that in their “wisdom” they exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like human beings. Do you see what they did? They had the God of the universe reveal himself to them in such a way that they were capable of making a real decision and in their wisdom they decided to worship not the creator of all things but images they had made with their own hands. They decided to bow down to images made to look like another person or birds or animals or reptiles. Instead of worshipping the Creator, they decided to worship the things made by the people who were made by God. Not only that, but they decided to worship the birds, animals, and reptiles that God put human beings in charge of in Genesis 1.

In all their “wisdom” they became fools through rejecting the One who made them and gave them order. The question, then, for us is: How different are we from those in 1st Century Rome? The answer is: We’re exactly the same, if….

We’re exactly the same if in our “wisdom” we exchange true glory for the fake stuff. We’re exactly the same if in our “wisdom” we demand God reveal himself on our terms instead of his. We’re exactly the same if in our “wisdom” we look at Jesus and seem him as someone other than God in the flesh.

“If any of you think you are wise by the standards of this age, you should become “fools” so that you may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight.” (1 Corinthians 3:18b-19a)