(Text Only)
Title: A Perfect Balance
I. Four Words
v7/8 (read) We see four consequences from Paul for the non believer:
1. Indignation: Greek “Thumos” Def:
1) passion, angry, heat, anger forthwith boiling up and soon subsiding again
2) glow, ardour, the wine of passion, inflaming wine (which either drives the drinker mad or kills him with its strength)
2. Wrath: Greek: “Orgay”
1) anger, the natural disposition, temper, character
2) movement or agitation of the soul, impulse, desire, any violent emotion, but esp. anger
3) anger, wrath, indignation
4) anger exhibited in punishment, hence used for punishment itself
a) of punishments inflicted by magistrates
Point: Point: God’s offense in our sin in directly linked to his demand for out holiness.
In other words: There is nothing harsh about God’s anger, in fact, if anything, he is lenient with our sin because some of us don’t receive the punishment we deserve.
3. Tribulation: Greek: “Thlipsis”
1) a pressing, pressing together, pressure
2) metaph. oppression, affliction, tribulation, distress, straits
4. Anguish: Greek: “stenochoria” {sten-okh-o-ree’-ah}
1) narrowness of place, a narrow place
2) metaph. dire calamity, extreme affliction
Point: In God’s extreme displeasure with our sin, he will place the sinner in a place of extreme displeasure. Here we see a balance being struck. His punishment is on par with his displeasure in us. His punishment is not greater than his displeasure, nor is it less.
My conclusion: Therefore, unless you are willing to say that God is not perfect, or that he has some flaw, you can never have the right to question his punishments unto man. We have no concept how holy God is. We have no concept how much our sin angers him. We have no concept how important true justice is to our Lord.
II. Paul’s Linguistic Clue
V10 Notice the link with v10 “Glory, honor, and peace…” with what we studied two weeks ago in verse 7 “Glory, honor, and immortality”
All the Greek lines up except “immortality” and “peace.” Why would Paul change this, and should we draw something from it. My suspicion is that because of how close these two lists appear to each other, only one sentence apart, that there is something going on here.
Let me ask you a question: Have you ever been at unrest with the idea of eternity? When I was a child, I just wanted to die at the end of my life, and have nothing else happen. Now that I am old enough to comprehend the abstract idea of eternity I don’t have a peace about the concept of eternity, but I do have a great sense of peace concerning my eternal destination.
Perhaps this is what Paul is alluding to: not only do those accepted as righteous before God have immortality, but the destination of their immortality is at peace in the presence of God.
III. No Partiality
V11 (read) Most scholars agree (myself included) that what Paul is referring to when he says this is that being right before God is not a matter of ethnicity, or background, or any “levels” of holiness assigned by men, but rather is a pure condition of where your heart is.
To Paul’s direct audience this was probably a rejection of some of the false teaching of Jewish believers who thought that they were accepted as holier before God because they were born into the line of God’s chosen nations.
It was also likely a rejection of the ideas out there at the time about extreme asceticism which taught that a spiritual discipline was heightened when physical discipline was added to one’s walk in order to heighten their understanding of their own sin.
Today, this concept is a great comfort to many of us as well. I don’t want to embarrass anybody, but imagine if you will that your spiritual standing with God was somehow linked to your parent’s spiritual standing, your brother’s or sister’s spiritual standing, or even your children’s spiritual standing. No thanks, I want to be accountable to God through Christ, and Christ alone. Amen?
Review/Close