10/12/13

From Ben Fronczek... Acts 18 & 19 – A Different Baptism


Acts 18 & 19 – A Different Baptism


A Different Baptism
Read: Acts 18:23-26
In the last sermon we talked about Aquila and Priscilla and their encounter in Ephesus with a man from Alexandria named Apollos. In this lesson I would like to consider a couple more things in this text that I did not have time to talk about last time. 

First of all I would like to talk a little about Apollos himself. From the text we know that he was from Alexandria, which was a great city in north Africa.  It was also the capital of Egypt. Alexandria was not only a center of learning, at one time it was home of one of the greatest libraries of the ancient world. Historians also tells us that almost a third of the population were Hellenistic Jews. In verse 24 we read that Apollos was a learned man. He was obviously educated. We also read that he had a thorough knowledge of the Scripture (which is referring to the writings of the OT). We also read that he was an eloquent and powerful speaker. Probably what most would consider a scholar.  So, he was not only well educated, and smart, and could speak well, we also read that he knew something about Jesus and presented what he knew to his fellow Jews in the local synagogue here in Ephesus. Exactly what he knew and what he preached, we don’t know. But we do know Apollos only knew about the Baptism of John the Baptist, so his message and full understanding of the Gospel message was incomplete if not erroneous.

Jesus had instructed His disciples in Matthew 28  “Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”  (So this is where Apollos fell short)

In Marks Gospel account of this in vss. 16 15-16 he records Jesus also saying, “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.”  

So this is a very, very important matter So how much was Apollos’ teaching lacking? We don’t know. We only know that Acts 18 indicates that the Baptism of John was not enough. Even though he was smart, eloquent, and sincerely wanted to serve God, his message and understanding concerning baptism was incomplete. Therefore we read that Priscilla and Aquila quietly invite him over to their home to teach him a little bit more. Now what I finds interesting is the fact that the author of Acts, Luke, continues on and shares with us another similar story in the following verses in Acts 19. Now you have to remember, Luke did not divide his letter into chapters and verses, rather this was done by translators of the original texts later on. So there was no pause between the story we just read about Apollos and the one we I about to read in Acts 19.

Read: Acts 19:1-7  “ While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples  and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when  you believed?”  They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 
So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”   “John’s baptism,” they replied.
Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.”  On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues and prophesied.  There were about twelve men in all.”

Do you see the similarity? In both accounts Luke is letting us know that we are dealing with devout disciples. Yet in both stories Luke stresses the fact that they had only received the baptism of John the Baptist. Thought devout,  their full understanding and knowledge of what Jesus wanted done was incomplete. And when they learn of their short coming, there is no hesitation. They are baptized and hence receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. In both stories we see intelligent capable disciples, who continued to hungered and thirsted for truth, and who were humble enough to heed the instruction they received. We should have such a spirit! A commentator by the name of Kent wrote, “The entire Book of Acts depicts the transition from Judaism to Christianity. It is not surprising, therefore, to find imperfect forms of faith during those epochal days.” Yet these men were still very teachable. They did not say like I’ve heard more than once, “Oh wait I have to go back and ask my minister about this,” even though they can read the word for themselves.
So what’s the big deal, isn’t one baptism as good as another? Wasn’t John the Baptist also sent from God? Obviously there was a difference. These people would not have had to be re-baptized if John’s  baptism was sufficient. So what’s the real deal about baptism any way? Even though Baptism in both cases involved plunging  a person under water, the reason or purpose in each instance is different. We are told here, that John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance, a preparation for the coming kingdom, in preparation for the coming Messiah Jesus, and what He was about to offer.   

Read Matthew 3:1-6  “In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.” This is he who was spoken of through the prophet Isaiah:
   “A voice of one calling in the wilderness,   ‘Prepare the way for the Lord,
   make straight paths for him.’”
John’s clothes were made of camel’s hair, and he had a leather belt around his waist. His food was locusts and wild honey.  People went out to him from Jerusalem and all Judea and the whole region of the Jordan.  Confessing their sins, they were baptized by him in the Jordan River.”

In the Gospel of Luke chpt. 3 it says that John came preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.  I like the way the NLT put it, 

“Then John went from place to place on both sides of the Jordan River, preaching that people should be baptized to show that they had repented of their sins and turned to God to be forgiven.”

In other word John was out there preaching, ‘Get your act together, the prophesied Messiah is coming.’ I’ve heard that phrase, ‘baptism of  repentance’ ever since I first became a Christian. But really what does it mean. Repentance is the key word. So what constitutes repentance here? It is not just saying that we are sorry for our sins. It is more than just feeling bad about the choices we have made. It is an admission of a wrongful life. It is turning away from one thing in order to embrace something new.  It’s turning from your way to God and His way! John lets his audience know that if one is not willing to give up his own selfish, misguided path, he cannot experience the joyful life of the kingdom to come.     

Read Luke 3:7-16  “John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath? 8 Produce fruit in keeping with repentance. And do not begin to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. 9The axe is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire.”
“What should we do then?” the crowd asked.
John answered, “Anyone who has two shirts should share with the one who has none, and anyone who has food should do the same.”
Even tax collectors came to be baptized. “Teacher,” they asked, “what should we do?”       “Don’t collect any more than you are required to,” he told them.
Then some soldiers asked him, “And what should we do?” He replied, “Don’t extort money and don’t accuse people falsely—be content with your pay.” The people were waiting expectantly and were all wondering in their hearts if John might possibly be the Messiah.  John answered them all, “I baptize you with water. But one who is more powerful than I will come, the straps of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.”

When we come to the point in our lives when we realize that our self directed steps have worn us down and we feel hollow, the Lord invites us to change direction and come to Him. But the life He invites us to only comes through death to self. We have to stop living for our self. We have to die to our selfish, self centered ways, and choose Him and His way. For, He is the way, the truth and His, is the only way to real life, life to the full, life in the Kingdom, and true forgiveness. And those us who like those Pharisees refuse His call to die to self will not experience kingdom life, even if we are baptized. If we are unwilling to die to our own self interests, we will never find life; or at least the kind of life God wants us to have. In other words, we have to put Him first before self. So John called his listeners to bear fruit,  demonstrating their repentance. He told the tax collectors to be honest and the soldier to live with integrity and contentment. While this may sound like simple external changes, they are radical changes of one’s heart and direction of life. If one does this they no longer live for self. We surrender our own kingdoms to embrace and infinitely larger kingdom. Preaching repentance did not stop with John.  It was also the very message of our Lord Jesus. While at a dinner party with tax collectors and sinners, the Pharisees and teachers of the Law started complaining to Jesus disciples about what Jesus was doing there. Jesus then told them in 

Luke 5:31 “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick.  I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

If we will not give up our own selfish, self centered behavior, and unless we die to those things  we won’t be fit for the kingdom of God. 

In Luke 9 23-25, Jesus said“If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.  For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self?  If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.”    

So we need to die to self. In light of this; Repentance therefore leads to baptism.  It’s where we die to self.  John the Baptist saw baptism as a sign of one’s willingness to turn away from the fruitless life of self-worship in preparation of the arrival of Jesus and a new life in God’s kingdom.

Jesus offered a baptism of ever-greater power. 
Baptism is a sign of our faith and willingness to take seriously the call to deny self, and repent, and it is also a sign that we are willing to take up our cross and follow Jesus and die. We hear the Gospel. With great remorse and growing excitement we repent of that life away from God, and then we walk with our Lord into that watery grave and die. We who trust in the redemptive work of Jesus, who are willing to turn away from a life of self-direction, are cleansed of sin after we die to self in the grave represented by baptism. But that is not all!  When we are Baptized in the name of Jesus, we are now ready to receive the Holy Spirit of God who will live inside us and direct our steps in our new walk.
Now Baptism is not a mindless ritual through which we magically receive salvation. It is an intentional walk into death upon repentance, where we by faith encounter the blood of Jesus, which give us new life. In Roman 6 Paul tells us that Baptism is a participation in the death burial and resurrection of Jesus. In Colossians 2 we are told that in the waters of Baptism Jesus performs a spiritual circumcision on us. In the OT, circumcision was a mark or sign on the man’s body that he was a Jew, a descendant of Abraham.  The Christian’s baptism is not like the circumcision the sons of Abraham had to go through, but rather it is a spiritual circumcision that Jesus personally performs on all of us, both men and women. It’s not only a mark or seal which identifies us as God’s own and initiates us into God’s family and kingdom, it also cleanses us and removes that sinful part of us.

Read Colossians 2:9-13  “ For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,  and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority.  In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.  When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature,God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins”

With Jesus graciously providing us with a new life, pure and sanctified, the Holy Spirit then come in and begins guide us in new our live. He gradually guides us and transforms us into the image of Christ when we learn to die to self  and  try to keep in step with Him. That’s why Aquila and Priscilla were so compelled to pull Apollos aside and teach Him about the Christian’s baptism. And I believe that’s why Luke mentions Paul’s encounter with the disciples in Ephesus in Acts 19. Because even though these were good and faithful men, it was not enough. Aquila, Priscilla and Paul knew how important the Christian’s Baptism is and just had to speak up. And today we also have many erroneous ideas about baptism going around. The first time I was baptized I was baptized as a infant. After reading scripture I realized as a baby, I had nothing to repent of. I did not choose to deny self and follow Jesus. I did not make any kind of personal commitment to Jesus. As a matter of fact I wasn’t even buried in a grave of water like they were in that first century. Someone dipped their finger in holy water and made the sign of the cross on my forehead. I knew I had to be re-baptized like these individual here in Acts. Some teach that we are save (free from sin) by faith in Jesus some time before we are Baptized. And then they are baptized some time later because it’s the right thing to do. They think they are saved when they first accept Jesus into their heart. I think I see a problem with that after reading out text. Right here in Acts we read about a number of individuals called DISCIPLES, who probably loved Jesus very, very much,  one of whom is preaching Jesus, yet they had to be corrected. Why? Because even though they knew Jesus, and loved Him, and were devout believers who had already been baptized, that baptism was not right or good enough. I truly believe there are a lot of disciples out there like these men who are good and faithful, even regular church attendees who were not baptized with a proper or clear understanding of what they were doing. Maybe they weren’t properly taught, or didn’t understand what they were doing. Believe me when I tell you that I do not doubt anyone’s faith in Jesus or sincerity. Yet is issue of baptism has become a stumbling block and has led to division in Christendom. So what are we to do? I think these stories are here for a reason. I believe the Lord is showing us by example that we have an obligation to address this issue with the love, and the concern that Aquila, Priscilla, and Paul had. I believe it’s OK to ask someone, even in the church when and how they became a Christian, even about their baptism. But I believe it should always be in a spirit of love, concern and humility.  And if you find that someone is in error, ask them in a loving way if you could share your view with them because you have seen or learned something little different in the scriptures that just may interest them. Maybe after hearing this today you may realize that you were taught differently, your own baptism may not be in line with what we talked about in this lesson. I think it is a good thing to reflect on why we were baptized, and take time to compare what we did to what we find in scripture.  Ask yourself if you really did it for the right reason. Did I repent and turn to God? Did I do it specifically to have Jesus remove my sin and perform a spiritual circumcisionon me? Question? Do you want to take that chance and gamble that God will accept your baptism if you didn’t do it for the right reason, or if you did not do it in the same manner as they did in the New Testament?  Isn’t it better to be safe than sorry?   Many years ago, after I started carefully studying this subject in my Bible, (even before I became an active member of any church), I realized much like Apollos and these other men that I needed to be re-baptized. After studying God’s word, and learned these truths,  I felt so much better for doing it for the right reasons and in the manner. My encouragement this week is to make a serious study of this subject. And don’t let yourself get caught up on old traditions, or what other people tell you.  It’s all right there in there in you Bible.


For more lessons click on the following link: http://granvillenychurchofchrist.org/?page_id=566

From Jim McGuiggan... GENTLE JESUS, MEEK AND MILD

GENTLE JESUS, MEEK AND MILD




 You might remember in the Kevin Costner and Sean Connery version of The  Untouchables that Costner (Eliot Ness) approaches Connery (Jimmy Malone) and asks him for his help to wipe out the Capone organization. Malone well knew that Ness hadn’t counted the cost so he hisses at him at several critical moments during their enterprise, “What are you prepared to do?” Malone is gunned down and as he dies, choking in his blood he pushes important information into Ness’s hand, looks in strained intensity into Ness’s face and hoarsely demands with his last breath, “What are you prepared to do?”
It’s right and proper to pay close attention to the qualities of Jesus Christ that please us. The warm compassion, the generous open heart that welcomed the outsiders and the pity that moved him to help so many. But for all his warmth and gentleness there was inflexibility with him when it came to his Holy Father’s will and human redemption so that more than once the stern character of grace showed. “I came not to bring peace on earth but a sword,” he said abruptly to his hearers (Matthew 10:34). 
I think it’s correct to say that we tend to swing between a flinty righteousness and a weak-kneed indulgence. This is due not only to lack of wisdom and warmth but also to the lack of gracious holy earnestness. God is more than willing to bear with our sulks or resentment when we don’t see him to be soft and tender as we’d like him to be. His holy earnestness and love, that purposes to redeem us and the world, takes priority over whether we like him or not. We’re too weak and ignorant in those areas to risk our popularity with one another and it shows in subtle and not so subtle ways.
Without the cross at the center of our own experience with Christ, life is reduced to the merely ethical and the blessings that will come if we’re all nicer to each other. In this way the focus on families becomes self-serving and the insistent call for church unity (with dogmatic issues sidelined) is reduced to all of us being tolerant with and nice to one another. That way we can all enjoy peace and tranquillity in the loving arms of Jesus as we continue to lean upon his breast. We call each other to bend over backwards to accommodate one another rather than calling one another to bend over backwards to accommodate God in trust-filled holy obedience. We tend to listen to the Word not do discover what God requires of us but what he will tolerate in light of the agendas we like to pursue. His agendaworld salvation by redemptionthat centers in the cross is derailed while we make the church environment even crozier. ["Let's bring in some drums and guitars, or ballet interpretations of texts or long and pleasing sections of the Andy Griffith Show or Walt Disney movies. That'll draw people in and keep the church folk happy."]
Early in the 1900’s P.T. Forsyth was pretty much a lone voice that blazed against religion that had become little more than an advocate of moral evolution and “Let’s all be neighborly.” There was nothing rude about the Principal of Hackney College but he was prepared to speak the truth as he saw it. No one was more concerned about ethics than Forsyth (he spoke of “holiness” rather than moral or ethical uprightness) but he rightly saw that if we don’t have cruciform vision, that ethics is severed from the gospel and that’s only another mask for death.
 “Disaster should end dainty and dreamy religion, and give some rest to the winsome Christ and the wooing note” he said at the outbreak of WWI. “It should discourage a religion more romantic than classic, which sacrifices the institutional truth of faith entirely to its intimate mood, a religion bland and brotherly, in which the ethical note of justification is smothered in a spurious type of reconciliation…It is a wickeder world than our good nature had come to imagine, or our prompt piety to fathom. [In light of the war] We see more of the world Christ saw and it calls for a vaster salvation and a diviner Christ than the one we were sinking to believe in. And it must cast us back on resources in that Savior which the mental coziness of comfortable religion, lying back for a warm bath in its pew, was coming to stigmatize as gratuitous theology.”
He was right and if you take a look and listen  to what's being offered as evangelical religion you'll know he's even more right today! Our popular talk of forgiveness through the cross ends up being little more than talk about forgiveness and God’s pity so that the cross is reduced to God’s finest expression of sweetness.
Faith in the crucified One becomes nothing more than a confession that we can’t save ourselves and that confirms our status as objects of sweet pity. Our ceaseless calls to better ethical behavior [the kind of thing even atheists call for] fall short of the call to saving faith, which has its ethical base in nothing less than the holy cross that alone satisfies the Holy Father. [Penal substitution is sick theology!] The church’s message then becomes a call to gradual moral development rather than radical redemption via the cross and it offers fine-tuning rather than radical redemption. We begin to think that the kingdom of God is established by niceness and tolerance. Christ didn’t seem to think that was so. 

The disturbing and demanding Christ

Forsyth’s views were based first on how he read scripture and those views were confirmed in light of how we humans are. There was a day in the middle of all the hoopla, when great crowds were streaming after him in the fever of band-wagon excitement when the Master turned to them and said, “If any one comes to me and hates not his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.” (Luke 14:25-27)
 “Cannot be my disciple.” He says it three times in nine verses so I presume he meant us to take it seriously. If you don’t hate father and mother you can’t be my disciple. If you don’t take up your own cross and follow me you can’t be my disciple. If you don’t renounce all you have you can’t be my disciple (14:33). What’s he got against families and parents? What’s he got against my wanting to live life with my own agenda?
None of this has that soothing sound we’d expect from a “gentle Jesus meek and mild” but it wasn’t the only time he said something like this. Earlier he spoke of his own approaching violent death and immediately added (Luke 9:23-24), “If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whosoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake, he will save it.” There’s that cross business again and what’s worse he has thrown in a “daily” experience of it. It’s not very soothing. On the whole (though I don’t think it’s any less demanding) I think we prefer the sound of, “By this shall all men know that you are my disciples if you love one another.” There’s room to maneuver in those words, you can sort of debate what “love” is and who’s included in “one another” (a la “who is my neighbor?”). But there’s something flat and toneless, something uncompromising about selecting a rough stake you to get yourself hung on. “You want to be mine?” he asks, eyeing one of the big pre-prepared stakes lying around. “Grab one of those and follow me.” I suppose there are some things you could never say with a smile and that might be one of them.
It was probably on that very occasion when he said he was to be die violently at the hands of the religious leaders that Peter strenuously objected to that kind of talk (Matthew 16:21-23). I might have said Peter’s, God forbid, Lord, irritated Jesus except that I think that “irritated” wouldn’t be strong enough. I think he was passionately angry with his friend. I wonder what made Jesus so inflexible when it came to the cross issue? “Get behind me, Satan!” he says to Peter. “You’re a hindrance to me; for you are not on the side of God, but of men.” What do you make of that?
Then turning to the rest of the disciples he said abruptly, “If any man would come after me let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me.” What’s all this taking up crosses business? And “follow” him; follow him where? Where do we think he was going dragging a cross? And, again, what does he have against parents and families that would lead him to talk like this (Matthew 10:34-37):
      Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I didn’t come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-lawa man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
Whatever else is true about all this, cross bearing must become personal to us for we’re told to take up “our” cross. Luke has Christ speaking to “all” and speaking of “any man” so the call to take up the cross is not confined to a particular group of disciples or leaders. And we’re told that it is to be a “daily” experience (Luke 9:23). It’s clear from this that the call is not just an initial commitment but also something that is to be renewed as discipleship develops.
The Christ of the cross assaulted the world powers. Of course he was interested in bringing forgiveness to individual sinners!!!!!!!! But to leave it there is to distort the gospel message. He came to create a new humanity, he came to bring about a new creation in which a new humanity would livea humanity re-created in his image. A new nation that would follow him to make war against the powers that have become the instruments of the world-spirit; powers that enslave humans who are created in the image of God and were created for better things than what they're now wallowing in.
 
What's this "taking up the cross" business?

©2004 Jim McGuiggan. All materials are free to be copied and used as long as money is not being made.

Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, the abiding word.com.

From Mark Copeland... Salutation To The Philippians (1:1-2)

                    "THE EPISTLE TO THE PHILIPPIANS"

                  Salutation To The Philippians (1:1-2)

INTRODUCTION

1. In our previous lesson we introduced the book of Philippians as a book
   that is very relevant to our times

2. As we actually begin our study of this epistle, we shall examine
   Paul's salutation as found in the first two verses...

[First, we notice...]

I. THE "AUTHOR" OF THIS EPISTLE

   A. IDENTIFIED AS "PAUL"...
      1. This is the apostle Paul, of course
      2. Who was once the "persecutor" - Ac 8:1,3
      3. But is now the "persecuted"
         a. For he is writing this while in Roman custody - Php 1:12-14
         b. During the time period mention in Ac 28:30

   B. HE IS JOINED IN THE SALUTATION BY "TIMOTHY"...
      1. A travelling companion who joined Paul during his second
         journey - Ac 16:1-3
      2. He was a young man, devoted to serving Paul, whom Paul loved as
         a son - Php 2:19-22
      3. He later was the recipient of two other epistles by Paul (1 & 2
         Timothy)

   C. TOGETHER, THEY ARE DESCRIBED AS "SERVANTS"...
      1. A title of humility, it denotes dependence, obedience, and
         acknowledgment of ownership
      2. Used in connection with Jesus Christ...
         a. It is a word with real dignity
         b. Indicates intense devotion to the Lord

[Having considered those responsible for this epistle, we next take a
look at those to whom it is addressed...]

II. THE "RECIPIENTS" OF THIS EPISTLE

   A. IDENTIFIED AS "SAINTS IN CHRIST JESUS"...
      1. The term "saint" was a common term by which ALL Christians were
         called in the New Testament
         a. Literally, it means "holy one" - cf. 1Pe 2:9
         b. The basic idea behind the word is that of "separation", for
            the purpose of consecration
      2. But note that they were called saints "in Christ Jesus"
         a. It is in Him that we are set apart
         b. Only by virtue by being in Him and having our sins forgiven
            by His blood can we be called saints - cf. Re 1:5-6; 5:9-10
      3. It is interesting to notice the contrast between "servants"
         and "saints"
         a. By using such terms, Paul immediately humbles himself and
            exalts those to whom he is writing
         b. Thereby practicing what he later preaches in regards to
            humility - cf. Php 2:3

   B. IN PARTICULAR, THEY ARE THE SAINTS "WHO ARE IN PHILIPPI"...
      1. That is, the church in Philippi
      2. The beginning of the church is found in Ac 16:9-15
         a. Prompted by the "Macedonia Call"
         b. Started with the conversion of Lydia
      3. Its early growth is also found in Acts 16 (verses 16-40)
         a. With the conversion of the Philippian jailor and his
            family
         b. With the church meeting in Lydia's home
         c. And with Luke staying at Philippi after Paul's departure
      4. Several things may be said about the characteristics of the
         church
         a. It appears to be predominantly Gentile (lack of a synagogue
            in Philippi would suggest this)
         b. It appears to be predominantly female (implied by meeting in
            Lydia's home and the reference to women in Php 4:2)
         c. They were very supportive in the preaching of the gospel
            - Php 4:15-16
         d. They provided for needy saints in other areas - 2Co 8:1-5
         e. They cared for Paul in his distress - Php 4:10,14

   C. ALSO ADDRESSED WERE THE "BISHOPS AND DEACONS"...
      1. In this verse, we see the organization of a local church as
         God intended
         a. It is made up of "saints" (the members)
         b. It is overseen by "bishops"
         c. It is served with the assistance of "deacons"
      2. Concerning the "bishops" (translated "overseers" in some 
         versions)...
         a. These were men charged with guarding the flock and providing
            spiritual food
         b. They were also called "elders" (or "presbyters"), and 
            "pastors" (or "shepherds") - cf. Ac 20:17,28; 1Pe 5:1-2
            1) For they were older men
            2) And they were to feed (or pastor) the flock under
               their charge
         c. According to the New Testament...
            1) They had to meet certain qualifications before they were
               appointed to serve as "elders-bishops-pastors" - 1Ti 3:
               1-7; Tit 1:5-9
            2) There was always a plurality in the congregation, never
               just one - cf. Ac 14:23; Ac 20:17; Php 1:1
      3. Concerning the "deacons"...
         a. The term means "servants" or "ministers"
         b. They also had to meet certain qualifications - 1Ti 3:8-13
         c. They served the needs of the congregation, under the
            oversight of the bishops (elders-pastors)

[So the recipients of this epistle was a well-established congregation,
one that had demonstrated their love and support for the apostle Paul.

Finally, we briefly notice the greetings given to them...]

III. THE "GREETINGS"

   A. "GRACE"...
      1. This was the common greeting of the Greeks
      2. It speaks of wishing unmerited favor and kindness upon them

   B. "PEACE"...
      1. This was common greeting of the Jews ("Shalom!")
      2. It speaks of the result of receiving favor and kindness

   C. "FROM GOD OUR FATHER AND THE LORD JESUS CHRIST"...
      1. This is the source of grace and peace which Paul desires the
         Philippians to receive
      2. For when one has received unmerited favor and kindness from God
         through His Son Jesus Christ, one truly receives peace:
         a. Peace with God - Ro 5:1
         b. Peace with men - Pr 16:7
         c. Peace with one's self - Php 4:6-7

CONCLUSION

1. At this point, we can see that this epistle is a personal letter
   between...
   a. A man in chains who is accompanied with a dear friend
   b. And a congregation of holy people whose love for this man has
      been demonstrated on several occasions

2. In the next lesson, we shall examine the "joyful thanksgiving" on the
   part of Paul for the fellowship he has enjoyed with the church at
   Philippi

In the meantime, are you experiencing the grace and peace that comes only
from "God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ"...?

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011