Energion Direct

Author: empower

  • Herold Weiss: Paul Did Not Teach Righteousness by Faith

    by Dr. Herold Weiss, author of Meditations on the Letters of Paul 
    Martin Luther’s argument against the selling of indulgences to shorten one’s stay in purgatory before reaching heaven was a courageous and necessary attack on a grievous abuse of ecclesiastical authority. The ninety five theses he nailed to the door of the church at the university where he was a professor of Scripture presented his argument with meticulous precision. At its core, the point was that “works” were not what saved those doing them. In other words, paying for sins did not open the gates of heaven. Said positively, Luther’s argument has survived and become encapsulated and promoted as “righteousness by faith.” These days the phrase is understood somewhat differently by different Christians. Generally, it is understood to mean that to be saved one must believe that the death of Jesus on the cross pays for one’s sins and thereafter believers receive strength to live in conformity with the Ten Commandments. In other words, salvation is attained by faith in a substitutionary atonement, and the keeping of the commandments, made possible by Christ’s grace, keeps believers from sinning again.

    I find the above understanding of righteousness by faith only tangentially related to the theology of the apostle Paul. It is true that there are two texts in Paul’s writings which could be understood in terms of substitution, but such an interpretation is not demanded by them. One says that “God shows his love for [eis] us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for [hyper] us” (Romans 5: 8), and the other says that “the life I now live in the flesh I live by [the Greek says “in”] faith in [the Greek says “of”] the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for [hyper] me” (Galatians 2: 20). The English of the first text uses the preposition “for” twice, but the Greek has two different ones. The Greek preposition eis usually is translated “toward.” In this case it indicates that God’s love is directed towards us, it is aimed at us. The basic meaning of hyper is “on behalf of,” “having to do with.” In other words, Christ’s death had to do with us, had us in mind. It was concerned with us. The idea also appears in the earliest Christian confession known to us. Paul quotes it as the foundation on which to build his argument against those who teach that there is no future resurrection. It said, “Christ died for [hyper] our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, he was buried, he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and he appeared . . . “ (1 Corinthians 15: 3). The confession is formulaic. The formula “for our sins” is balanced with the formula “on the third day,” and both are declared to be fulfilments of the Scriptures. In summary, that Christ’ death had to do with “ us,” “me” or “our sins” was the customary way of affirming that Christ’s death had not been just a Roman execution, which in fact it had also been, but an event of cosmic significance in which God was involved. It was “concerned with” the life humans live under the power of sin. These texts do not show that Paul saw the death of Christ as a substitute for the death of sinners.
    Paul is quite clear, however, on the necessity for all men and women to die with Christ. In other words, the predominant Pauline teaching is not that Christians need not die because Christ died for them, but that all must participate in the death of Christ in order to also live “in Christ.” He does not teach a substitutionary atonement but the need to die to life in the flesh and live free from the condemnation of the Law (Romans 6: 4-8; 8:1).
    The first thing one should know about Paul’s understanding of faith is that for him it is not a noun but a verb. It is a serious handicap that English does not have a verbal form of the root “faith” as it has one of the root “belief.” Faith is not a belief. Faith is a way of being. As Paul says in the verse quoted above, I live “in the flesh” and “in faith.” To live in faith is to live in Christ by the power of the Spirit. For him salvation is not by faith as the adoption of a belief. Salvation is something God accomplishes for those who “live in faith,” that is, those who live faithfully in Christ. Righteousness is not a stamp placed on those who affirm a particular proposition as true, but something “attained to” (Romans 9: 30) by those who live in ‘a manner worthy of the Gospel” (Philippians 1:27).

    Paul defines the Gospel as “the power of God for [eis] salvation to every one who has faith” (Romans 1:16, RSV). The translation “to every one who has faith” provokes misunderstanding. Paul wrote, “to all the faithful.” Faith is not something to be had, something to be grasped intellectually. The Gospel is not information to be believed, but power to live faithfully (Romans 1:16). Paul says that righteousness can never be attained from [ek] works of law. It can only be attained through [dia] faith in Jesus Christ, or from [ek] Christ’s faith (Galatians 2:16; both expressions are found in this text). This is so because those who have been baptized and thereby have been crucified and raised now have Christ living in them and are guided by the Spirit that made them a new creation. They are “alive to God in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 6: 11), rather than dead under the Law. Paul, quoting Habakkuk, says that the righteous live from [ek, out of] faith (Galatians 3: 11). In other words, for Paul faith is not a way of knowing but a way of living.
    The mantra of righteousness by faith may be used to live unlovingly; it may serve as an excuse for living denying the Gospel’s power to give life. True Christianity is not a theological system, but a way of being. Paul emphasizes that Christians are those who crucify themselves with Christ and participate in the faith that brought about Christ’s resurrection and gives new life to the believers. That Christ died “for [hyper] all” (2 Corinthians 5:14), does not mean that therefore no one else needs to die. It means that his death was concerned with all, and all are welcome to die with him having the faith that Christ himself had in God when he died. Faith has to do with a manner of living and of dying.

    Paul makes very clear that at the Parousia all will have to appear before God’s judgment and give an account of what they have done (2 Corinthians 5:10). God’s judgment is definitive; therefore, Paul insists, no believer has the authority to judge another. God’s judgment, however, is not an evaluation of what people believe, but an assessment of whether or not they live “in the faith of Jesus Christ.” Since all believers are servants of their Lord Jesus Christ, only their Master has the authority to judge them (Romans 14:4, 10).

    Paul also warns his converts of the necessity to live as members of the body of Christ who are guided by the Spirit. As such, they are empowered by the Spirit to discern the will of God (Romans 12:3). Living in the Spirit, guided by the Spirit is living “in faith.” It is living empowered to “approve what is excellent,” and thus be “pure and blameless for the day of Christ” (Philipians 1:10). The conduct of those who have Christ living in them is no longer determined by the conditions of life “in the flesh,” in which the Law of Moses rules. Those who live faithfully are beyond the power of the Law to condemn (Romans 8:1), but not beyond the judgment of God. The sins of the believers are the things they do which are “not of faith” (Romans 14:23). As Paul says, God’s righteousness has been revealed “apart from the Law” (Romans 3:21). According to Paul, those who live actualizing their faith and hope, that is, those who demonstrate the power of God’s promise to give life to the faithful attain to righteousness. That is Paul’s understanding of righteousness by faith. It has to do with the actions performed by those who live in the faith of Jesus when he faced death. It has nothing to do with the Ten Commandments and judicial declarations.

  • Tuesday Night Hangout: Marriage in Interesting Times

    This past Tuesday night (July 19, 2016), Energion owner Henry Neufeld interviewed Dr. Bob Cornwall about his new book Marriage in Interesting TImes: A Participatory Study Guide. One of the key questions is just what is a biblical marriage and how does one go about studying the biblical view(s) on marriage and applying principles to our lives in the 21st century.
    Free evaluation copies of Bob’s study guide are available to people who are considering using it in a small group or classroom study. Find more information and a form to request a free evaluation copy on this page.
    9781631992278m

    [slideshow_deploy id=’2343′]

  • Bruce Epperly: The Book of Ruth, Gleaning, and the Social Safety Net

    by Dr. Bruce Epperly
    Leviticus 19:9-10 proclaims:

    When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God.

    The God of Israel recognized the reality of poverty. God was well aware that poverty is more often the result of accident and misfortune than laziness. As the Hebraic scriptures, or Old Testament, constantly asserts, God hears the cries of the poor. Abraham Joshua Heschel described God’s relationship to the world in terms of “pathos,” God’s passionate care for the vulnerable, grounded in God’s experience of their pain.
    God is not aloof, but our companion every step of the way. Passionate for justice, the details of life matter to God, as can be seen from Hebraic laws and prophetic critiques. God is concerned that the scales for weighing be exact, that farms be maintained by owners and not foreclosed, that lending be a matter of ethics and not profit, and that every child be fed.
    Gleaning, or what we would describe as the “social safety net,” was not optional nor was it a matter of generosity. It was law! God’s law, and it was required of landowners and institutions. The divine passion inspired prophets to cry out against the injustice of economic inequality and the dissonance of poverty in the midst of plenty. Everything is personal to God, and this means business and government as well as individual relationships.
    Ruth and Esther CoverThe Book of Ruth is more than a pretty love story. Now, I must confess that I like the happy endings of Hallmark movies. I delight in performing weddings and celebrating at wedding receptions. The Book of Ruth is often invoked in weddings and the relationship of Ruth and Boaz is often seen as purely romantic. But, it was also a matter of economic survival and the welcoming of a foreign women into the Jewish community.
    Ruth can be read as immigration story, as a reminder that strangers have a place in our communities because they are God’s children, too! Ruth can also be read as an argument for a strong social net provided by government and business as well as personal generosity. Worried about their survival, Ruth goes to the wheat fields to gather food, the leftovers at the edges, and perhaps to catch the eye Boaz, who will provide economic security for this mixed race family. As scripture notes: “And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, ‘Let me go to the fields and pick up the leftover grain behind anyone in whose eyes I find favor.’”
    Ruth had a right to glean in the fields. She was poor and she was a foreigner and God’s law mandated that Boaz provide out of his largesse for the well-being of the power. All’s well that ends well. Ruth marries Boaz, bears a child, and becomes the great-grandmother of King David, Israel’s greatest king. Dig deeper, the greatest king was the descendant of a foreigner, an immigrant, and a welfare recipient. Although she was single and childless at the time, Ruth’s experience is similar to today’s single parents, the working poor, doing their best to support a family on a minimum wage job. Ruth’s experiences is also mirrored in the couple, both of whom work in the service industry, perhaps serving our lunches or cleaning our rooms, who barely scrape by, who receive no sick leave from their employers and must go to work or not be paid or lose their job, and who live from paycheck to paycheck and must depend on government services for health care and child care. (For more on Ruth, see Ruth and Esther: Women of Agency and Adventure.)
    In the midst of the election cycle, the Book of Ruth challenges any form of “dog whistle” politics that asserts that the poor are lazy and undeserving, and highlights “welfare queens” (with the implication that these are people of color) while neglecting our nation’s subsidies of corporations, many of whose employees must receive their health care from the government, our tax dollars, because wealthy corporates often fail to give benefits or a living wage to their employees.
    In today’s world, the practice of gleaning was a tax. It was God’s requirement, codified in Hebraic law. Generosity was encouraged in Israel, but generosity is always optional and arbitrary. Law is a requirement. Those who call themselves Christians would do well to look at the principle of gleaning, as well as the sabbatical and jubilee years, as a reminder that we have a social responsibility for the poor and vulnerable and that governmental support for vulnerable people is a necessity and not a luxury in securing the protection and the common good of the nation. This means fair taxes for the wealthy and corporations, who gain the most from our economic and governmental systems. Christians would do well to challenge candidates for whom lower taxes are an idol and who want to “starve the beast” and in so doing, starve our families and children.
    To God, it’s never just business or public policy or profit, its people and their joy and pain. God rejoices when the city streets are safe, children are laughing, everyone has enough to eat, and families are secure. God delights in just such public policies and governments that care for the least of these.

  • Thomas Hudgins: Satan, Judas, and the Events Leading Up to the Cross

    by Dr. Thomas Hudgins, translator of Aprenda a Leer el Griego del Nuevo Testamento
    Aprenda CoverHow did Jesus go from walking around Galilee, teaching the multitudes, healing the sick, and dining in people’s homes to having his body marred more than any other human in history and eventually giving his life for the sins of the world on the cross? Well, there are a number of ways we can approach this question, such as by focusing on the religious elite of Jesus’ day and how they wanted Jesus dead and out of the way. But I want to turn our attention to Satan and Judas Iscariot, paying special attention to where Judas’ life intersects with the workings of the evil one.
    The Gospels tell us that Satan was actively involved in leading Jesus to the cross. Maybe you recall where it says in one of the Gospels that Satan “entered into Judas” during the last week of Jesus’ life. But this begs the question, “To which Gospel am I referring?” I say that because there are actually two references in the Gospels to Satan entering into Judas—one in Luke, and one in John. And there are a couple of details that make these reports difficult. So, let’s look at each account and then we can step back and make some observations. I have placed in italics the text indicating Satan entered into Judas.
     
    The first report is found in the Gospel of Luke:

    Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was approaching. The chief priests and the scribes were trying to figure out a way they could put him to death; for they were afraid of the people. And Satan entered into Judas who was called Iscariot, who was one of the twelve. And he went away and discussed with the chief priests and officers how he might betray him to them. They were glad and agreed to give him money. So he consented, and began seeking a good opportunity to betray him to them apart from the crowd. Then came the first day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed. And Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, so that we may eat it.” (Luke 22:1–8)

    The second report is found in the Gospel of John:

    When Jesus had said this, he became troubled in spirit, and testified and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray me.” The disciples began looking at one another, at a loss to know of which one he was speaking. One of his disciples, the one who Jesus loved, was reclining on Jesus’ bosom. So Simon Peter signals to him, and says to him, “Figure out who Jesus is talking about.” He, leaning back on Jesus’ bosom, say to him, “Lord, who are you talking about?” Jesus then answers, “The one for whom I shall dip the morsel and give it to him.” So when he had dipped the morsel, He takes it and gives it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. After the morsel, Satan entered into him. Therefore Jesus says to him, “That which you are doing, do it quickly.” Now no one that was reclining at the table knew for what purpose he had said this to him. Some thought he said it because Judas was in charge of money box, and Jesus was basically saying to him, “Buy the things we need for the feast”; the other option was he was saying Judas should give something to the poor. So after receiving the morsel he went out immediately; and it was night. (John 13:21–30)

    Alright, so you can tell there is something going on here in the accounts that needs our attention. According to Luke, Satan enters Judas before the disciples sit down to celebrate the Passover. In fact, according to Luke, it takes place before the plans for the Passover meal are finalized. According to John, Satan enters into Judas during the Passover meal. Luke mentions demonic possession in a number of places (Luke 8:30, 33). John, however, makes no such mention in his Gospel, well except one. The sole mention of possession in the Gospel of John is this entrance of Satan into Judas. So how many times did Satan enter into Judas—once, twice, or never at all? And why did Satan enter into Judas, or, depending on how you answer the first question, why did the authors of their respective Gospels indicate that Satan did so?
    I’m going to go ahead and show my cards. I think Satan entered into Judas twice. Part of the reason I answer this way has to do with what I think about the Scriptures. They are inspired by God and, as a result, they are true in the reports they present. They are totally accurate and the accuracy of their content flow out of the very character of God, for whom it is impossible to lie. Even if someone does not agree with this view on biblical inspiration, the evidence in John supports two entrances of Satan into Judas. John does not directly mention the entrance found in Luke. Why not? Well, John focuses heavily on sharing material that is not found in the other Gospels. And John focuses heavily on describing the events of the last night of Jesus’ life (John 13ff.). Even though John does not specifically mention the entrance found in Luke, he does seem to make an indirect reference to it. He writes:

    During supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, to betray him, Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he had come forth from God and was going back to God, gets up from supper, and lays aside his garments; and taking a towel, he girded himself. (John 13:2)

    When John indicates that the devil (i.e., Satan) had already put the desire to betray Jesus in the heart of Judas, he is probably referring to the account found in Luke. John specifically mentions Satan’s involvement in this desire. He put the desire inside Judas. And apparently he needed to enter Judas in order to accomplish this end. Satan enters Judas the first time to put the idea in Judas’ mind and heart. And considering how Satan is presented in other texts (e.g., Genesis 3; Matthew 4), he probably did everything he could to make the idea as appealing as possible. Just think, if Satan could take Jesus up to a mountain and show him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory (and offer them to Jesus in return for his worship), how appealing would he make this opportunity to betray Jesus and in exchange for what (though an offer is nowhere mentioned in the Gospels or elsewhere)?
    So Luke records this first entrance. That moment is the first time Satan shows up personally and out front in the plan to get Jesus to the cross. Luke foreshadowed this moment after the temptation: “When the devil had finished every temptation, he left him until an opportune time” (Luke 4:13, emphasis added). That first entrance into Judas was this opportune time, and Satan would take a very active role leading up to the cross from that point forward, both with the betrayal of Jesus and the temptation of some (possibly all) of his apostles. I say some of his apostles (plural), not one of his apostles. The reason is because Jesus told Peter leading up to the cross that Satan was going to tempt him and the other apostles: “‘Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you (plural) like wheat; but I have prayed for you (singular), that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers’” (Luke 22:31–32). The mention of the first entrance by Luke connects the dots from Luke 4 to Luke 22, and it reminds Theophilus and his greater audience that the cross has not only the attention of all of heaven, but that of all of the domain of darkness as well. John connects the dots as well. His Gospel in many ways is the “behind-the-scenes” Gospel, providing us with some very important and always interesting details about the life of Jesus. The second entrance of Satan into Judas is one of the many offered by John. In the first entrance, Satan plants the idea in Judas’ mind and heart. In the second one, he executes the plan and secures that Jesus will be taken into custody.

  • Politics Moment: Rejecting the Liberal and Conservative Labels

    Energion owner Henry Neufeld interviews Allan R. Bevere, author of The Politics of Witness and the just released Colossians & Philemon: A Participatory Study Guide on the U. S. election and our response to it. This was recorded on Friday, July 15, 2016, before the coup attempt in Turkey, but the attack in Nice and relations between law enforcement and members of the community in the United States were included. Allan served for some time as a police chaplain.
     

  • David Moffett-Moore: Book Review of "The Making of an Ordinary Saint" by Nathan Foster

    Book Review by Dr. David Moffett-Moore
    The Making of an Ordinary Saint: My Journey from Frustration to Joy with the Spiritual Disciplines. Nathan Foster. Baker Books. Grand Rapids. 2014.

    Nathan Foster is the adult son of Richard Foster, author of the classic Celebration of Discipline: The Path to Spiritual Growth. This book is his reflection and response to his father, as well as to his father’s well known tome. Celebration was written in 1978, has sold over two million copies in English and been translated into twenty-five other languages. Along with others, it motivated Richard Foster to form “Renovare,” an international and ecumenical community promoting personal spiritual renewal. I expect everyone reading this review has also read Celebration or at least heard of it.
    I grew up as a preacher’s kid, with all the subliminal strings attached to that relationship. Imagine growing up as the child of one of the most influential spiritual writers of the late twentieth century. Poor Nathan barely stood a chance. I remember seeing a matched set of tee shirts, one saying “Saint: Someone married to a Martyr” and the other “Martyr: Someone married to a Saint.” Somewhere in this dynamic tension, Nathan had to find his own way.
    The book is very much a contemporary exploration of the classic spiritual disciplines, each taken in Nathan’s own way. There is ample personal sharing; it is always “on the way,” not “in the way.” Nathan’s personal sharing of his reaction to each discipline, whether as a rebellious youth, wandering young adult, or a more settled disciple, makes the discipline more personal and more relevant. Without being obvious, he has updated his father’s efforts.
    Nathan includes the same twelve disciplines his father identified, but sets them in his own order, making his own path among them. In Nathan’s order, they are: submission, fasting, study, solitude, meditation, confession, simplicity, service, prayer, guidance, worship and celebration. Though the two books take different paths through the disciplines, they both end with celebration! In this telling, Nathan offers an explanation of the discipline, his experience of that discipline, and then identifies a saint who is an example of each discipline. I enjoyed the honesty and humility exhibited by his willingness to share from his own journey, his own frustrations and struggles, his own path to his own peace. Nathan’s sharing is not as a spiritual exhibitionist, but rather invitational, inviting the reader to share in the journey.
    The church I serve has several “Christ Care” groups, members who meet twice a month for devotion, sharing, mutual support and study. Two of those groups are currently using this book as their study book. Every two weeks they read a chapter and share their responses, questions and reflections on the text. The concept of “spiritual disciplines” and “spiritual formation” as formally structured is new for them and both groups are thoroughly enjoying this introduction.
    Nathan has an earlier book, Wisdom Chaser: finding my Father at 14,000 Feet,” in which he shares his experience of getting re-acquainted with his father as an adult himself, by climbing the “Fourteens” in the Colorado Rockies, mountaintops at least 14,000 feet high (Intervarsity Press, 2010). This book is equally well written in Nathan’s very personal, reflective, conversational style. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it and, as a father of two adult sons myself, was touched by its shared intimacy.
    I encourage anyone who has read Richard Foster’s Celebration of Discipline to read Nathan Foster’s contemporary update of his father’s work. Anyone who has not read Celebration and is interested in or curious about spiritual formation or spiritual disciplines would enjoy reading Nathan’s offering and benefit by it. I found it informing and enjoyable.

    [slideshow_deploy id=’2755′]

  • Politics Moment: Chris Eyre on the Rapid Change of Prime Ministers in the UK

    Chris Eyre answers a few questions on British politics asked from an American perspective.

  • Prayer and the Nation

    The Jesus ManifestoOur Tuesday night hangout was actually recorded around 1 pm central time yesterday. I had a great conversation about prayer, especially prayer in a time of crisis and prayer for our nation with Dr. David Moffett-Moore. What good does prayer do? How does prayer relate to action? You may be surprised at some or Dave’s answers to my questions.

    [slideshow_deploy id=’2755′]

  • Allan Bevere: Your Confirmation Bias is Showing

    Confirmation Bias affects all of us. Nowhere is confirmation bias exhibited more clearly than on social media, such as Facebook. Those on the conservative end of the theological and/or political spectrum tend to post links to stories that make their side look good as well as posting things that cast aspersions and even evil on those with whom they disagree. They also tend to ignore that information that counts against their views on various issues. Those on the liberal end of the theological and/or political spectrum do the same thing. (I have suggested before that the modern conservative/liberal spectrum is incoherent, but that’s another post for another time.)

    Read the rest on Allan’s blog at Allan R. Bevere: Faith Seeking Understanding.

    [slideshow_deploy id=’2564′]

  • Doris Murdoch: Capernaum, the Town of Jesus

    by Doris Horton Murdoch, author, Testify: By the Blood of the Lamb and the Word of our Testimony and Constructing Your Testimony

    Capernaum signpostThe town of Capernaum, called the “village of comfort” and the “cradle of Christianity”, has been recognized as the “town of Jesus.” In Matthew 4:13-17, prophecy was fulfilled when the great light, Jesus Christ, settled in the territory of Naphtali and Zebulun which is the town of Capernaum. Jesus left his childhood home of Nazareth and made Peter’s house his ministry residence or home. Investigating the history and archaeology of the town of Capernaum and Peter’s house aids in understanding to the events involving Jesus in the town of Capernaum from the gospel scriptures. Then, one is led to the question, “What did the town of Capernaum and Peter’s house mean to Jesus and His disciples?”
    Capernaum (Capharnaum, Kefar Nahum, Bethsaida, Talhum, Elkosh) was a fishing village on the northern banks of the Sea of Galilee. The town was located on the Beth-Shan or Damascus Highway; this was much more suitable than Nazareth with so many people, especially merchants, passing through the Capernaum community. The Roman garrison was housed in Capernaum while the Roman capital was farther away in Tiberius. This location puts some distance between Herod Antipas in Tiberius and those spreading the gospel message of Jesus Christ in Capernaum.
    The town of Capernaum was inhabited continuously from 2 B.C. – 7 A.D. During Jesus’ time, the population was composed of fishermen, farmers, artisans, merchants and publicans, all different in trades but appearing to be getting along in the area. Capernaum was a cultural melting pot. Romans and Greeks influenced the culture (manners, dress, architecture, and politics) of the town. Again, the varied cultures appear to be working together for the good of the community. The Roman centurion found in Luke 7:1-10 actually built the synagogue that the Jews worshipped in.
    Capernaum 1The disciples, Simon Peter, Andrew, James, John and Matthew were all from Capernaum. God had a purpose in placing Jesus in Capernaum to begin the selection of the disciples and in preparing those disciples for ministry. Capernaum was also known as the village of Nahum (650 B.C.), the Old Testament prophet who was sent to the Assyrian capital city of Ninevah. Nahum means “comfort” or “consolation” for Nahum brought consolation to the nations oppressed by Ninevah. Nahum 1:1 states Nahum is from Elkosh; it is believed Elkosh was renamed Capernaum to honor the prophet Nahum with his popularity being greater in Judah because his prophetic message was against Assyria. At this time, God’s favor was for His chosen people in the land of Judah. Capernaum was a place of comfort or refuge for Nahum, Jesus, His disciples and for the people ministered to during this time period.
    In Matthew 8:14-16 (NRSV), we read about Jesus visiting Peter’s house in the town of Capernaum,

    “When Jesus entered Peter’s house, he saw his mother-in-law lying in bed with a fever; 15 he touched her hand, and the fever left her, and she got up and began to serve him. 16 That evening they brought to Him many who were possessed with demons; and he cast out the spirits with a word, and cured all who were sick.”

    Peter’s house also became known as the first house in the Christian world for the followers of Jesus, domus-ecclesia. Besides housing Jesus and His followers, Peter’s house provided a home for him and his family, his brother, Andrew and his family and for his mother-in-law. It was a large home running north to south. I envision a door on the northern and southern ends, with the north end opening to a street. Then the south door opens to a courtyard that ends as a gate on the street across from the synagogue. My understanding is that there would be rooms opening to the courtyard that housed the various extended family members. The main house structure of Peter’s home had a moveable rooftop; in Mark 2:1-12, we read about the paralytic being lowered down on a mat through an opening in the rooftop for healing by Jesus. Stairs in the courtyard would have led to this rooftop. It is in Peter’s house that Jesus identifies His true family, the family of believers, who are on the inside, not outside. In Mark 3:31-15, the Christian community is inside Peter’s house and Jesus’ mother and brothers are outside looking for their family member, Jesus. Those that desire to be in the family of God must come inside to be with Jesus.
    Archaeological ruins and scripture reveal much about the town of Capernaum. In 1838, the American scholar, Edward Robinson, discovered the ruins of Capernaum and identified the synagogue. In 1905, Germans Kohl and Watzinger began excavation of Capernaum. Ongoing since 1968, has been the excavation of Peter’s House by Corbo and Loffreda. As one walks the ruined streets and excavated structures and graffiti of Capernaum, the mind of a believer can envision the bustling streets of the biblical Capernaum.
    Capernaum 2In scripture, we read about Jesus teaching and performing miracles in the synagogue of Capernaum (just 30 meters south from Peter’s house) in the books of Mark, Luke and John. In John 6: 22-71, Jesus taught the doctrine of the Eucharist in the synagogue of Capernaum. Jesus also performed many miracles in the town of Capernaum (Luke 7:1-10; Mark 1:21-28; Mark 1:29-34). Mark 2:14-17 tells about a meal at Matthew’s house where Jesus dined with tax collectors and sinners. In this scripture, Jesus reminds us that He did not come to call the righteous, but sinners. In Mark 5:21-43, we read about Jesus healing the bleeding woman when she touches His garments and then we read of the twelve year old daughter of one of the synagogue officials named Jairus’ being brought back to life. The house of brothers and disciples, John and James, has never been identified through archaeological studies, yet archaeologists are sure they’ve brushed off stones that have come from their ancient residence.
    The house of Peter was home, a place of rest, for Jesus and His disciples. They came here for meals, sleep, and fellowship with fellow believers. Their ministries were rejuvenated as they shared testimonies of new believers, listened to Jesus teach and observed the power of Jesus as He healed the sick and freed others of demonic spirits. The town of Capernaum was a ministry classroom; the disciples first learned to minister in the town of Capernaum. They shared the gospel of Jesus Christ in the streets as people of many cultures passed through on the Damascus Road. They ministered in the homes and the synagogue of Capernaum; their audience may have been Roman soldiers and their families or it may have been a blue-collar worker like a farmer or fisherman or highly respected publican, tax collector or merchant that we might call a white-collar worker. Capernaum was truly the mission field or town of Jesus for the village had all the ingredients for the making of the Church of God.
    Reader, “What did the town of Capernaum and Peter’s house mean to Jesus and His disciples?”

Energion Direct
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.