(The site that you are now on is our unofficial website)

The Charge to Pastor George

Pastor Reuther brought a charge from 2 Timothy 4:5 which consists of four parts.

1. Be sober in all things. 

2. Endure hardship.

3. Do the work of an evangelist.

4. Fulfill your ministry.

The Future of Providence Reformed Baptist Church

Pastor George is anxious to begin woroking full-time in the ministry at PRBC. He begins his work on June 14, 2010. He will be setting up his office/study in Abington, PA, and will begin to teach, preach, visit, and evangelize in the Warminster area. We invite you to come and visit the church soon. Watch for announcements and developments at PRBC on this website.

Photo – left to right: Pastor Alan Dunn, Pastor Bart Carlson, Pastor John Reuther, PRBC Pastor George Xenophontos, PRBC Deacon Jack Firth

Pastor John Reuther

Announcing: Ordination Services for George Xenophontos

June 6, 2010

Providence Reformed Baptist Church

800 N. York Rd (Rt. 263)., Warminster, PA 18974

10-10:45AM ~ Pastor George Xenophontos Preaching

10:45-11:15AM ~ Fellowship

11:15AM ~ Morning Worship, Ordination Service, Charge to Pastor X. from Pastor John Reuther (Covenant Baptist Church, Lumberton, NJ)

Lunch ~ All are invited to join us.

2:30PM ~ Final Service ~ Pastor Bart Carlson (Trinity Baptist Church, Montville, NJ) preaching the charge to the congregation.

Call 215 773-8246 (PRBC) for more information, or 609 845-7032 (Pastor Reuther).

I have had the privilege of fellowship with George over the last 4 years. He has been teaching at the Heritage Baptist Christian School in Mt. Laurel, NJ for the last 8 years. I have preached in the school chapels and George has preached regularly here at Covenant Baptist in Lumberton, NJ.

George & Jenna have been married for 3½ years and have two children: Luke Theophilus (2), and Elissa Grace (2 mos.). George is a graduate of Bob Jones University, where he majored in history and biblical counseling. He is enrolled in Reformed Baptist Seminary and plans to pursue the M.Div program at RBS more vigorously now that he will be full-time in the ministry. As he labors full-time in the ministry at Providence, it is our hope and prayer that God will bless PRBC with growth for the prospering of the Gospel in this part of Bucks County for many years to come. 

George is a gracious man of 31 years and a gifted preacher. His wife Jenna is a woman of God who is seeking to honor God as a wife and mother. She will be a great support to our brother as he serves the people of God in Gospel ministry.

Pastor Bart Carlson from Trinity Baptist Church of Montville, NJ (a sister Reformed Baptist Church), and I will be ordaining George to the Christian ministry at PRBC on June 6, 2010. The day will begin at 10 AM with Pastor Xenophontos preaching. I will bring the charge at 11:15 at his ordination. There will be a lunch served and the afternoon service will begin at 2:30 when Pastor Carlson will bring a charge to the congregation. You are cordially invited to attend if at all possible. Please contact the church is you have any questions, or if you would be able to let us know that you will be coming. Or you can contact Pastor Reuther at 609 845-7032.

Pastor John Reuther – Interim Pastor of PRBC

God made us, and when a baby is born into our lives we stand in awe of God’s creative power and skill. But do we ever stop to think about the birth and origin of a true church of Jesus Christ in this world? Let’s look at how Paul describes the birth of the Thessalonian church in his first letter to that church.

Divine Birth

When Paul and Silas went on the 2^nd missionary journey, they were prayerfully laboring to bring churches to birth. They preached to that end and trusted the power of God to do the work. Like the second birth of a Christian (Jn. 3:6), true churches are “born from above,” and are not the creation of man. God gave Paul, Silas, and Timothy an important part in this divine creation, but the origination was from Him alone. When we remember that God created the world, mankind, and believers in Christ, let’s remember that He creates churches too.

Just as our salvation is the work of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, so is the planting of a church. More than this, the persevering of a church so planted is also His work. Notice Paul’s language in the letter as he writes that the new church in Thessalonica was in the Father (1:1, 3), in the Lord Jesus (1:1, 2), and with the Spirit (1:6). It happened in the will of the Father. It was the immediate effect of the work of the Son who was crucified, risen, and ascended to heaven. And the completion of the new church creation came about by the power of the Holy Spirit.

What a different view we will have of our church when we understand these things. How much more we will value its entire life span as we rejoice in its perseverance through the providence of God. A church is true by virtue of its divine creation.

Divine Choice

The second factor in the existence of the church is God’s choice of the people. How many times in our lives have we needed to choose our next church. But God in fact chooses the church. Paul wrote “….knowing, brethren beloved by God, his choice of you…” (1 Th. 1:4). God chose the people whom He saved and added to that church. Their conversion and the calling into existence of the body were coincident, at the same time. And after Paul writes of God’s choice in verse 4, he states that the Gospel which the missionaries preached “did not come to you in word only, but in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction….” (1 Th. 1:5). They spoke the word, the Spirit brought the word to life in them.

When Paul and Silas came to Thessalonica they immediately went to the synagogue and reasoned with them from the Scriptures (Acts 17:1-2). They gave evidence that Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead (17:3).  “Some of them were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas” (17:4). Here were the first converts among God’s elect in that city. Paul taught them again that it was the word of God “which performs its work in you who believe” (1 Th. 2:13). They did not choose God, they did not choose the church in that city, God chose them. We see evidence all around us of “churches” that are the mere creation of man, but not this one. And in all generations it is the will of God working in the word of God, made effectual by the Holy Spirit, that reveals the sovereign choice and election of God in a true church. All else is counterfeit.

Human Instruments

God brings churches to birth because He is the Creator, but He uses chosen instruments as He did in Thessalonica. Paul was very conscious of the human agency of the missionary team in the divine planting of this church. The first mention of human agency is found in 1 Th. 1:5 where Paul says “for our Gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction…” Whose gospel was it that Paul and Silas were preaching? Paul says it was their Gospel. In this claim of ownership Paul is saying two things. First, that they were the human agents in preaching the gospel. Second, that those who had come to make trouble in the Thessalonian Church had a false message. After the missionaries had been “run out of town” (Acts 17:10),  men with evil intentions came to discredit the gospel that Paul preached by attacking the messengers. But Paul said “you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake.” God uses men of His choosing as human instruments to do what only He can do. Paul reminds them that in the preaching of this Gospel, they heard and saw the very power of God, the anointing of the Holy Spirit, and the granting of the gift of assurance to the hearers. The Thessalonians were not to discount the human agency of Paul, Silas, and Timothy in the divine creation of their church. Neither ought Christians in any generation discount or minimize the work of God in choosing and sending missionary and pastoral agents to them to bring them to faith and their church to life.

Healthy Baby

God accomplished His will to bring to birth a new church in the great city of Thessalonica, and the result was “a healthy baby,” a healthy church. Warren Wiersbe described chapter 1 as “a church is born” and chapter 2 as “helping the baby grow up.” That’s it.

When a baby is born into the world the doctors look to see whether the vital signs are strong and the baby is breathing normally. Paul mentions their vital signs in 1:3. The Thessalonian Church was born into the world with vibrant spiritual health. Paul commends them for their work of faith, their labor of love, and their steadfastness of hope in the Lord Jesus Christ and in the presence of God. It is as if Paul is setting forth the standard of a healthy baby church: Faith directed toward God in Jesus Christ; Love flowing from Him through us to others and manifested in good deeds; and that future-looking Hope, the visionary grasp of what awaits us in Christ that makes spiritual work a labor of love and not a burden. This health is the result of true conversion: “you turned to God from idols to serve a living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, who rescues us from the wrath to come” (1 Th. 1:9-10).

Another concern which we have when a baby is born is the bonding of that infant with his or her mother and father. Paul speaks of this with reference to the church in Thessalonica. In 1 Th. 1:6 Paul writes of the bond of love and communion which was created between them and the Lord. “You became imitators of us and of the Lord.”

All the family and friends want to see the new baby. And so it was with the Thessalonian Church. Paul says “so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia. For the word of the Lord has sounded forth from you, not only in Macedonia and in Achaia, but also in every place your faith toward God has gone forth…” (1 Th.1:7-8). 

Healthy baby – healthy church, because God brought this church to birth through faithful men whose desire was to do the will of God in obedience to the Great Commission. They were not men who resorted to gimmicks or deception in order to draw people to themselves. “For our exhortation does not come from error or impurity or by way of deceit; but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not as pleasing men, but God who examines our hearts. For we never came with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed. God is witness. Nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others… but we proved to be gentle among you, as a nursing mother tenderly cares for her own children. Having so fond an affection for you, we were well pleased to impart to you not only the gospel of God but also our own lives, because you had become very dear to us” (1 Th. 2:3-8).

Now what does all of this mean for us today? Let’s be much in prayer that God will bring true churches to birth. Let us pray for the work of church planting in our generation and for faithful, fervent men like Paul who will go forth to preach and gather converts for churches. As the Gospel is preached and sinners hear of the salvation that is found only in Jesus Christ, may they be formed into true churches like the Thessalonian church. Let’s be deeply concerned and prayerful about the Gospel vitality of our own church and seek, by His powerful grace, to foster it in our own lives. And let’s always return to the Scriptural standard and pattern of what the churches of Christ were designed to look like. A careful analysis of these Thessalonian letters will greatly aid us in that pursuit.

A true church is God’s baby. If you have ever had a little baby yourself, you know exactly what this means, and you can easily figure out how it will help us all to regard the church, both in its divine and human aspects, standing in awe at God’s work of creation, and holding esteem for those whom God used to do the work (1 Th. 5:12-13). May we also repudiate all man-centeredness in the planting, planning, and populating of churches.

 We can buy almost anything without even leaving our homes. Shopping has been transformed into an online search for things that are first virtual, and only actual when they are delivered to the door. The revolution in shopping even impacts church shoppers. It’s a fact of life that Christians do church shopping. We can shop for a church on the internet, as you may be doing here today, or we can drive around and notice churches in our area to visit.    

Is church shopping a good thing? What could be wrong with it, one might ask? Are there any cautions when shopping for a church? These are just some of the questions that this and other articles in this series will try to address. It is important to be a savvy shopper in the world of commerce today, especially e-commerce. We need to look for bargains, yet we know that we “get what we pay for,” and a bargain is not always a blessing. Sometimes buying “cheap” is penny wise and dollar foolish, as the old saying goes. And shopping for a church requires spiritual savvy, or better, spiritual wisdom and discernment based on the word of God. Without this we may “buy” into a church which does not have all of the marks of one which the Master Builder Himself, Jesus Christ, is blessing with true spiritual fruit.  

As I see it, what so often happens when Christians go church shopping is that they compare churches with churches. They evaluate churches to see which one suits them the best and offers the most for their particular or perceived needs. Any number of criteria may be employed in determining which church to place in your shopping cart. If you have children, it may be which church has the best programs to meet their needs. If you have no children, it may be which church has the best couples group. If you are single, it may be which church has the best likelihood of producing a potential marriage partner. Then there are issues of style and atmosphere, comfort and convenience. Which church has the atmosphere that suits me? Which church has the kind of pastor who preaches the way I like? Perhaps you prefer the small church atmosphere so that you can get to know everyone right away and stay in touch; perhaps you are drawn to the larger church, feeling that large numbers are an evidence that a church is right on target. Instead, it seems to me that our starting point should be comparing churches with Scripture. This is biblical. In the Old Testament, the people of God were organized under the theocracy of God’s kingdom in a civil-spiritual-covenantal administration where the Temple was the central place of worship. Presumably sometime during the exile the synagogue system arose as the people were dispersed to foreign lands. Jesus Himself attended the synagogue services regularly, and the synagogue structure was providentially used by God to prepare the way for the worship of the New Testament churches. But in the apostolic period, people did not have the choices that Christians have today, so here is the problem: Christians today not only face choices in choosing a church, but the issue of comparing churches with Scripture. For this Christians need to know the doctrine of the Church as it is revealed in the Book of Acts and the rest of the New Testament, and need to choose churches based on their likeness and faithfulness to Scripture revelation and apostolic practice. Even a cursory perusal of the Letters to the Church in Revelation 2-3 would give us many evidences of what Jesus is looking for in His churches. 

There is no perfect church, just as there is no perfect Christian. No doubt you have heard that if you find a perfect church, don’t join it or it will cease to be perfect! But a true Christian is a man or a woman who walks in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord (Lk. 1:6). You see, conscientious, careful, God-glorifying Christian-living is real and we have many examples in Scripture and in church history of faithful church members, pastors, deacons, and churches. It is not perfection that we are looking for, it is faithfulness to every word of God in the structuring of church life (2 Tim. 3:16f), biblical conduct in the church of God (1 Tim. 3:15), biblically-qualified elders and deacons (1 Tim. 3), and holiness, integrity, and devotion to the God of the Bible who promises to bless His work when we work His way. Paul expressed the kind of caution and care that we must give to building the churches of Christ in 1 Cor. 3:10 where he said “According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder I laid a foundation, and another is building on it. But each man must be careful how he builds on it.” We just don’t have the liberty or license to do whatever we want in building a church which bears the name of Jesus Christ the Lord. 

Here are just a few considerations. A good church may not be a big church. Size itself is not an indicator of wholeness. It may not be a church that has “a wide array of programs” for every age. A church may be a “great working church” like Spurgeon’s Tabernacle and conduct many ministries, but it may also be guilty of having activities that demand too much from its members. Even programs and ministries must be brought to the test and touchstone of Scripture to see if they have His approval. We cannot judge a church on whether it always makes us feel good, or require that it never make spiritual demands upon us. 

A good church is a church that has the stamp of the work of the apostles. In other words, a good church is a church that looks like a church that the apostles planted. Someone may object: We live in a different culture. But I ask: Are people any different now than they were in the days of the apostles? Are their needs any different? Is there another Gospel to give to moderns which suits their situation in history better than the Gospel which Jesus and the Apostles preached in ancient times? Obviously modern churches have modern buildings, comfortable seating, air conditioning, comfortable rest rooms, good lighting, amplification, and other creature comforts. There is nothing objectionable in any of these things and we can use them advantageously. But a true church is one that retains and reinforces all Scriptural truth concerning the proliferation of apostolic churches uncorrupted by false doctrine or aberrant, sinful living. I am not saying that we should not strive to minister to the people of our culture, nor ignore the pressures that modern life puts on people. I do not believe in wearing people out with unreasonably long or tedious sermons, but rather labor with the conviction each week that the word of God must be preached Scripturally, exegetically, and with sensitivity to how much people can bear given their level of Christian maturity and providential circumstances. But on the other hand we must not make preaching and teaching, or worship services and prayer meetings, nothing more than “Christian” entertainment with enough Bible added to it to make it spiritual. 

Let’s explore this theme further in the next article in this series.  

Pastor John Reuther

Are you the head of a household, the pastor of a church, or do you hope to be in this role one day?

Then here is a parable for you,  a profound word from the Lord Jesus, a story in a saying, a picture in a proverb: “Therefore every scribe who has become a disciple of the kingdom of heaven is like a head of a household, who brings out of his treasure things new and old.” It causes heads of households to ask whether their households (ministries, etc.) are filled with trash, trivia, or treasure. What does your household look like?

This parable came at the conclusion of a series of parables that Jesus told His disciples, recorded in Matthew 13.   The parables tell us what the kingdom of God is like. Jesus was calling His disciples to feast on the fullness of the kingdom when He taught the parables of the sower, the tares in the field, the mustard seed, the leaven, the hidden treasure, the precious pearl, and the dragnet.  But then He asked them whether they understood all of these parables. They said “Yes” (Matt. 13:51). Then He told them the parable of the head of the household, because by means of this parable He would show them that they must now go out and help others to see what they were privileged to see.

There is nothing more important than to understand what the kingdom of God is, how it has come to us, where it is taking us, how to enter into it, and what it affords us. In Matt. 12:42, Jesus told the disciples that He is greater than Solomon. You cannot appreciate who Jesus is unless you understand His relationship to Solomon. He gave us a collection of proverbs that enable us to put the truth of God to work in our lives to live effectively and efficiently for His glory.

But the Lord Jesus excelled Solomon. This is because He is the God-man who brings wisdom directly from heaven to earth. It is also because He is the sinless son of God who overcame every temptation, something that Solomon did not do. Solomon’s wisdom enlightens our eyes, but his declension saddens our hearts, and causes us to look for the perfection of wisdom in Jesus. Third, it is because Jesus came preaching the Gospel of the kingdom of God, showing us the way, the truth, and the life that leads us to heaven. Solomon was a wise man, though merely a man. Jesus is the incarnation of wisdom, the sinless God-man. Heads-of-households, consider the attention-getting parable of the householder from our “Greater-than-Solomon.”           

The Conversion of a Scribe

The parable begins with the story of a converted scribe. In Old and New Testament times scribes did the important work of copying, interpreting, and teaching God’s word. Ezra was the greatest scribe in the history of the nation of Israel: “For Ezra had set his heart to study the law of the Lord and to practice it, and to teach his statutes and ordinances in Israel” (Ezra 7:10). But the scribes of Jesus’ day were unlike Ezra, and the difference became apparent when Jesus began to teach and preach publicly about the presence of the kingdom of God.

“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from men, for you do not enter in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in” (Matt. 23:13). It must have been painful for Jesus to speak this way about fellow-Israelites, but they were guilty of great sin in this regard. The scribes of Jesus’ day were handling the treasures of God’s word yet mishandling them. Truth was tradition for them, not treasure. They were more concerned with immortalizing their traditional interpretations of the law rather than anticipating the fulfillment of the law in the Messiah, the true treasure of Israel. To them, the handling of truth was a job, not a joy.

The scribes joined with the Pharisees to test Jesus and debate with Him. They gave the appearance of being  interested in Jesus. “Then a scribe came and said to Him, Teacher, I will follow You wherever You go. Jesus said to him, ‘The foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head’” (Matt. 8:19). They were familiar with the word of God, but not followers of the truth as God was revealing it to them in Christ. Consequently, they were not men who set forth the truth as treasure to be cherished and employed in the service of the kingdom of God. Jesus declares in the parable that conversion sets a scribe on the right path, restores the scribe to his rightful role, and makes him the dispenser of treasures to bless the people of God.   

Nothing would have brought the Lord Jesus greater joy than to see a scribe become a follower of the kingdom of heaven. The scribes, along with the Pharisees and elders of the people, were supposed to be spiritual leaders and safe guides, but they were poor and pathetic ones because they did not seek truth and dispense the treasure. How tragic that scribes who had an intimate knowledge of the word of God and a lifetime of opportunities to study the plan and purpose of God should miss the truth and reject God’s plan. “But the Pharisees and the lawyers (scribes were also called lawyers) rejected God’s purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John” (Lk. 7:30). But the conversion of a scribe led to discipleship, leadership, and headship, like that of a head of a household.

God calls all people: scribes, fishermen, tax-collectors, men, women, and children to repent of their sins in order to enter the kingdom of heaven. “The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of heaven is at hand, repent and believe in the Gospel” (Mk 1:15). It is one of the curses of the ages that men and women are not familiar with God’s word, but foreigners to its light and life. Study the Bible like Ezra the faithful scribe and follow the Lord Jesus as a true disciple of the kingdom.

Paul said: “For I want you to know how great a struggle I have on your behalf and for those who are at Laodicea, and for all those who have not personally seen my face, that their hearts may be encouraged, having been knit together in love, and attaining to all the wealth that comes from the full assurance of understanding, resulting in a true knowledge of God’s mystery, that is, Christ Himself, in whom  are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Col. 2:1-4). When we come to Christ we become like converted scribes, students of the word and sons of the kingdom.

Have you been converted and become a disciple of the kingdom? Christ will no longer be a mystery to you. Have you found your greatest treasure in Him? You will be rich with treasures of the kingdom. Now, are you also the head of a household, a leader, a pastor, a political leader? You will have all you need to bless and guide in your particular household with the treasures of heaven, no matter how large or small it is.           

The Care of a Household

The word used of the head of the household in Matt. 13:52 is oikodespot. Oikos means house and despot means ruler. Jesus was not referring to a tyrannical despot who rules arbitrarily and cares only about his own selfish interests. The ruler of the household whom Jesus is speaking about is one who rules lovingly, caringly, and bestows richly from his treasure. The householder is anyone who is given the stewardship of a house, a church, or a governmental realm.

Some men rule as tyrants in the home, or mere managers in the church, but these men have no commission from God to rule in this way. And tyrannical, arbitrary, and selfish rule in any household is a denial of God’s sovereignty to rule in the households of men or the household of God. Such household despots repudiate rather than reflect God’s love, grace, and mercy for sinners. If you are a man who rules in your household with any measure of self-will or self-interest, I loving urge you to turn to Jesus the Master and be converted and/or corrected.

The head of the household that Jesus is talking about is a good man, not a despot. He is a benevolent, caring ruler of his household. He is not merely given rule of his household, he is given resources of great treasure with which to bless his household. The test of a man’s rule in the household is how much of the treasure he passes on to his wife and family, to his church, or to those under his sphere of rule. Even mothers of children bring out of their treasure to bless their households (Prov. 31:26).

But a man must have the treasure in himself, otherwise his leadership in the home will not be good, but bad. Listen to what Jesus said about this. “Either make the tree good and its fruit good, or make the tree bad and its fruit bad; for the tree is known by its fruit….For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart. The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil” (Matt. 12:33, 35). A true head of a household is a good man who brings forth good fruit from the good treasure of God. Jesus is saying: don’t pretend to be something you are not. Either we are good and bring good out of our treasure, or we are bad and bring no good to our households because we have what He calls only an “evil treasure.” How alarming that is.

Jesus Himself was this kind of ruler over the household He came to care for in His incarnate life among us. Jesus is compared to Solomon, and also to Moses, as in Heb. 3:6. This passage shows that Jesus has charge over the house of God today, as Moses did in Israel. The church of God is called the household of God in 1 Tim. 3:15, because Jesus has organized the people of God into the family of God on earth which He will lead to His eternal kingdom.

Unlike the scribes, Jesus was faithful to His calling. He dispensed out of the treasure things new and old. The subject of the new and the old was an important one in the teaching ministry of our Lord. He established the old and brought the new, always emphasizing the vital and organic connnection of the old and the new.

He said “Do not think that I came to abolish the law and the prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill” (Matt. 5:17). This statement compares to what Jeremiah said: “Thus says the Lord, Stand by the ways and see and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; and you will find rest for your souls” (Jer. 6:16). When God works in history to save sinners and build His kingdom, He is establishing paths for future generations to follow. He does not want those paths to become overgrown with weeds so that they are no longer discernible. He wants us to keep walking in those old paths, for they are the heritage upon which God continues His work in our lives.

God wants us to have continuity with the past and reap the harvest of what He intended to bring to later generations. A good man brings out of his treasure a rich display of biblical history to feed his wife, family, and church, with. He has a good growing knowledge of the work of God and a desire to make those old paths the foundation of his household and church life and purpose.

But Jesus also spoke often about the coming of the new and the fulfillment that He came to bring. With fulfillment came certain changes that needed to be made. Old Testament history was the foundation; God was continuing to build His kingdom and Church in Jesus. The old paths lead to the new, but the new builds upon the old. He told a parable about this also: “But no one puts a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment, for the patch pulls away from the garment, and a worse tear results. Nor do men put new wine into old wineskins; otherwise the wineskins burst, and the wine pours out and the wineskins are ruined; but they put new wine into fresh wineskins and both are preserved” (Matt. 9:16-17). There is a newness to the Gospel that builds on the old, and forges ahead in the new. The converted scribe understands and accepts the old and the new and sees God’s grand design in both. The unconverted scribes opposed Jesus and with the Pharisees and leaders of the people, put Him to death.

Now what does this mean for the head of a household today? Look for the second installment in this three-part series soon. 

Interim Pastor John Reuther

Let’s connect two beautiful statements from Paul’s letter to the Philippians: “For me…..to live…..is Christ…..” (Phil. 1:21), and, “I press on…..toward the goal…..for the prize…..” (Phil. 3:14). There is a poetic rhyme or meter in the English Bible in these two verses which makes them easy to remember. I recommend that we treasure these two statements in our hearts for repeated meditation, and relate these two statements in our exegesis. 

In Philippians 1:21, Paul is showing us how to view life. It is a statement of the Christian worldview in its boiled-down practical essence. If we were given the assignment to state our Christian-life worldview in a summary statement, we would expect to be allowed at least 100 words or more in which to do it. But imagine being told: state your Christian life worldview in six words. We would think that quite unreasonable. But this is what Paul has done in Phil. 1:21. Is this your Christian-life worldview? 

Philippians 3:14 is Paul’s way of showing us how to live life. He is telling us there that the Christian life is a race to be run. We recognize that the Christian life is not only a race to be run, for other analogies of the Christian life are used in Scripture (e.g., it is warfare to be won). But the analogy of the race to be run is certainly a comprehensive expression of Christian living because reaching the goal appointed for us is of the essence of our salvation. Christ himself said, “he who endures to the end shall be saved” (Matt. 24:13). Are you running the race to reach the goal? 

For Me

For Paul to say that Christ was his whole life is truly astounding. This is the man who took great pains to describe himself in all of his true colors, and this he did in numerous passages of the New Testament. But right here in Philippians 3:5-6 he tells the big story about himself: “circumcised the eighth day,” (ritual cleanness)…..”of the nation of Israel,” (nationhood)…..”of the tribe of Benjamin,” (bloodline)…..”a Hebrew of Hebrews,” (choice)…..”as to the Law, a Pharisee,” (zeal)…..”as to zeal, a persecutor of the church,” (hostility)…..”as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless” (ethical morality). What a mixed-up set of virtues. What a messed-up man Paul was. He was everything that Judaism came to be in its checkered history, and worst of all, Paul represents all of those Pharisees who opposed Jesus and incited His death, all rolled up into the one man Saul! 

To Live

I dare say that most people live life without first understanding it. They live it without learning what it means and how it works. A person can live life by the trial and error method. If something doesn’t work, or involves too much pain or loss, they’ll just try something else.  A person can life by the Eat, drink and be merry approach. Try to get the most that you can out of life and enjoy it because the day is coming when it will be all over. No doubt Paul is reflecting back on his life and confessing that he was living it the wrong way, a wretched way indeed. Grace had come and given him a new life in Christ, so that finally, he knows how to live. And his confession reveals that there is only one way – this way: For me to live is Christ. This confession is the norm for living in the real world where God is sovereign and life is precious.

Is Christ

Now Paul is confessing Christ as every true follower of Him must do, and will do. It is a simply grand confession belonging to all Christians: For me – To Live – Is Christ. It means that all of our faith and trust is in Christ, and toward the Father through Christ. We place no confidence in the flesh, and seek no control over our pathway. Rather we commit our way to Him and trust fully in Him to do for us what only He can do. All of our hope is in Christ. We hope for many things and have many desires, but our ultimate and far-reaching hope is in the promises assured to us through the New Covenant sealed in His blood. That righteousness, for which we hunger and thirst daily, is found in Him alone. Sin, the greatest of human problems, is solved in Christ as we receive from Him Divine forgiveness and cleansing. The wisdom we need to work our way through the difficulties of this life are all found in the wisdom which He gives. Truly Christ “became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption…” (1 Cor. 1:30). Christ is the only true and lasting comfort that we have in sickness, sorrow, and death. Comfort and consolations abound in Him and thus in the deepest trials of life our confession is a firm anchor for our storm-tossed souls. 

How is it with you my friend? How is it with me? Can we really make this confession and mean it? Let’s be careful now. Watch out for religious God-talk. I often catch myself when I am singing a hymn and ask myself: “Do I really mean that?” It’s so easy to sing the hymns and be detached from what we are saying. I remember when my children were young how sometimes I would catch myself reading them one of their favorite story books and hardly remembering what I read after the words came out from my mouth. If we confess For me To live Is Christ, it will need to be with substance behind and beneath it. And when we confess these words substantially there will be a corresponding style of life that befits them. 

Connections

The connection between Phil. 1:21 and 3:14 is easy to see. I press on…..toward the goal…..for the prize. For me, Paul says, I press on. To live is to be oriented toward the goal. And Christ is the prize. I am not a runner and I do not know the euphoria of running and crossing the finish line. So I depend on those who are runners and do know that feeling. Paul certainly identified with the Greek races. And it is clear to see in Paul’s words in Phil. 3:14 the three things that are essential to running and winning: a good start, momentum and endurance, and a passion for victory. 

I Press On

A good start in a race gives confidence and helps the cause of momentum and endurance. A bad start adds another requirement to running and winning, the need to recover. This can be done and some runners win with this added strength. But the good start is nevertheless essential. For living the Christian life we might rather call this element “A fresh start.” We need a fresh start in every Christian grace and duty. Think of how many times you have proved it to be true in your own Christian life. How many times have you found yourself recommitting yourself to more life-transforming and consistent Bible reading and devotional prayer? Remember how many times we began again to work on dealing with a besetting sin or the cultivation of the fruit of the Spirit? This is what Paul is saying in the words I press on. I like to think of the simple daily routine of pressing the on button of my razor or the computer or the appliance in order to get the work going. So we must engage ourselves in the Christian life by pressing on. How do we do this? By starting with the heart. Psalm 119:32 makes the connection: “I shall run the way of Your commandments, for You will enlarge my heart.” When seeking a good start, a fresh start, we do well to assess the state of our hearts, because David is saying that it is the heart that propels us forward; not a big heart with little knowledge, but good knowledge impelled by a great heart: “Incline your heart to understanding” (Prov. 2:2). “Watch over your heart with all diligence” (Prov. 4:23). “A tranquil heart is life to the body” (Prov. 14:30). “A joyful heart makes a cheerful face” (Prov. 15:13). “Give me your heart my son” (Prov. 23:26) is what God is calling us to do. And Paul reminds us always “do not lose heart” (Eph. 3:13). 

Toward the Goal

Paul uses the phrase kata skopon, which is translated “toward the goal.” The Greek phrase envisions Paul against the goal. He must get to the goal and overtake it. And in the process he must keep a steady pace and a firm footing. This contemplates the runner’s momentum and endurance. And in the previous verse he seems to be telling us about the two most important things that are involved in maintaining momentum and experiencing endurance. 

The first is forgetting what lies behind.  In the context Paul is referring to his former manner of life in Judaism, his wickedness and shameful behavior. Moreover, he is thinking about the fruitless and insulting pursuit of one’s own righteousness. He is not saying that he wipes away every last vestige of memory about himself that is so loathsome to him. The past has didactic value for us. We are meant to learn from it. But we are not to allow the past to cripple or paralyze us. Paul did not glory in his past; he could not forget his past; he walked away from his past and from that old man to embrace the present of grace and the future of glory in Christ. Each one of us must run the race by keeping the past in proper perspective. The past is God’s providence in our lives, and valuable for that reason. God’s providence is His personal leading, and even though it be through the mix and mess of an experience like Paul’s, it is ours, and ours to learn from. But when the past is met by the grace of God it enters into great glory by renouncing the shame and folly of the old. It is only because of the grace of God that we can walk away from it, say goodbye to it, renounce it, and move on. For Paul the past represented mighty big issues. For us the past may not have such weighty matters to press us down. But each one of us must assess how the past looms to weigh us down, hold us back, and keep us from running with endurance and keeping a good momentum toward the goal. We must get the past into the categories to which it belongs: providence, experience, maturation, and a more sober approach to sin and saving grace. 

The second thing that Paul says about momentum and endurance is that we must reach forward to what lies ahead. We see it in the nerves and muscles of the runner. A race is a forward-moving and forward-looking way of life that involves stretching and reaching. We must expand our minds, our knowledge, our emotions to bear with new situations, our reason to reach for new avenues of problem-solving, and our love for new ministries of service. We cannot allow ourselves to get stagnant. God has not called us to life-as-usual. Our life in Christ is dynamic, growing, expanding, and we are always expecting that God is changing us to fit us for new challenges. 

Too often we are resigned that things must always be the way they are. Rather than stretch ourselves with goal-oriented pleading and praying, we just grumble about situations and complain about the way things are. So often God’s providences are designed to move us off center and point us away from ourselves. I am convinced that God often brings circumstances into our lives (which we do not like) to move us to consider other avenues and options. How often does God close one door to open another, or “deprive” us of something only to bless us with something completely unexpected?

 For the Prize

What is the prize here? He says that it is the “upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” In the analogy of running the race, it is the victory, and the fulfillment of our passion for victory. In the reality of the Christian life it is the finalization of the original call. We have been called in the Gospel to follow Christ. We have been called out of the world and saved from a crooked and perverse generation. We have been called into fellowship with His Son. Obviously, this calling is multi-faceted. But Paul focuses on one aspect of the calling in his statement of purpose. He mentions the direction of the call. It is upward, that is, heavenward. The race is won in heaven. Heaven brings us into ultimate possession of the prize which is Christ Jesus and the glorious inheritance we have promised in Him. To be spiritually-minded is to be heavenly-minded while we live our lives on this earth. But this earth is not our home. We are steadily progressing through it with a runner’s passion to reach the end of the call. Every call involves movement: the call to a task, the call to a decision, the call to a meeting, and the call to salvation in Christ Jesus. Godliness, sanctification, holiness, self-denial, devotion, commitment, faithfulness, applied to running the race is movement toward the goal. The quality control of the Christian life is endurance and momentum toward the goal for the prize, not success in the here and now (though many successes attend faithfulness). The one who calls is the one who also crowns the runners who run with endurance to the very end. Be one of them!  This new year 2010 is, in a very real sense, a fresh start for us all. Yes, the calendar to which we are bound has this built-in gift: a New Year. Can we do any better at this new beginning than to come to grips with Paul’s confession of the Christian-life worldview and his portrayal of the Christian-life race? I do not think so. Let’s do it!

For me to live is Christ / I press on toward the goal for the prize! 

Pastor John Reuther – Providence Reformed Baptist Church

1. Mary was “found to be with child by (ek) the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 1:18).
2. “The child who has been conceived in her is of (ek) the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 1:20).
3. “The Holy Spirit will come upon (epi) you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow (episkiasei) you; and for that reason the holy child shall be called the Son of God” (Lk. 1:35).  

The discovery of Mary’s virgin pregnancy 

Matthew emphasizes Joseph’s discovery of the miracle of the conception. The narrative revolves around Joseph’s response and the social implications of Mary’s pregnancy. Upon learning that Mary was pregnant, Joseph immediately thought of how to put her away, but the explanation of the angel of the Lord explained its miraculous nature and quieted his restless agitation over this news. Mary had not been unfaithful. The new life in Mary’s womb is the fruit of the Holy Spirit (Matt. 1:20). The new life is out of or from the Holy Spirit. This is the same language found in Matt. 1:18; “before they came together she was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit.” 

The explanation of Mary’s virgin conception  

Luke’s account revolves around Mary. The angel Gabriel visited her with the surprising greeting ‘Hail! Favored one!’ Luke 1:31 indicates that the conception had not yet occurred (the verb being in the future tense), suggesting that that Mary received the announcement first, since Joseph was told that Mary had already conceived. Luke 1:35 is the grand statement of the virgin conception: “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God.” 

The Secret Work of the Holy Spirit 

Matthew’s simple prepositional pronouncements (ek – out of, from) are grand in their own simple way. The preposition ek denotes separation, i.e., the place, in this case the person, from whom the separation comes; the origin of the child conceived. He is “separated” from the Holy Spirit, has His origin from the Spirit, is of the Holy Spirit. How did the child in Mary’s womb get there? Not by human activity, but by placement in her womb by the direct but secret activity of the Holy Spirit. This is miracle. It is supernatural activity in Mary’s humanity creating the new life, yet in such a way that Mary begins to have a perfectly normal pregnancy. Once the child is conceived (Grk. gennao) in her by the immediate agency of the Holy Spirit, He grows according to the mediate agency of second causes created by God in His design of human procreation. The Greek gennao refers to the male activity in begetting a human life in the womb, but the Holy Spirit works apart from the male principle by giving conception out of Himself. The conception is the fruit of the Spirit Himself in the womb of Mary, setting in motion the created design of pregnancy, but without the male seed. 

Now Luke’s description of the Spirit’s work in the conception uses more exalted language. He explains the conception in Old Testament imagery of the Spirit coming upon men to empower them, as Gerald Hawthorne explains, “to enable them to do what they could not do by themselves” (Num. 24:2; Judg. 3:10).[1]  

There are no mythical or erotic overtones in Luke 1:35. The Spirit is not going to come upon Mary in the mythical sense of a god coming to procreate with a human. The biblical picture is like that of the strong man overpowering the weak in the power of the kingdom of God, as explained by Jesus in Luke 11:20-23 ~ “But if I cast out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are undisturbed. But when someone stronger than he attacks him and overpowers him, he takes away from him all his armor on which he had relied and distributes his plunder.” The kingdom of God is advancing in this coming of the Spirit upon Mary. And it is a Trinitarian work: The Father comes, through His Spirit, to create the new life in which the son of God will bring forth the kingdom with the good news of the Gospel. Fitzmyer says “Right here in Luke 1:35 are brought together all of the ingredients necessary out of which the doctrine of the Trinity was later to be formulated – “the Most High,” “the Son of God,” and “the Holy Spirit.”[2] 

The Holy Spirit Created the Life of Christ 

Should we view this conception out of the Holy Spirit as a physical manifestation of the Spirit or a spiritual one? 

The Holy Spirit was not the substance out of which the child was formed, but the efficient cause.[3] The conception was physical, in that an actual human baby was formed, but it was a spiritual manifestation of the Holy Spirit of God because the Spirit effected the inception of His life; He was the cause of conception. We all have life from the Spirit of God in our conception (Job 33:4), but it is through secondary causation which the Creator established as a law of the universe and of human life. But Jesus was not conceived by this second cause of human procreation. He was conceived by the first cause: direct, immediate, divine activity and intervention working without mediate causation.  Christ’s conception was miraculous because it did not involve a human seed. 

The Holy Spirit overshadowed  (episkiasei) Mary. This beautiful word points to the creative power of the Holy Spirit coming to do what only God can do. Hawthorne describes it thus: “The Holy Spirit is the creative, powerful presence of the Most High over and around and with Mary. As the tabernacle was full of, contained, the Shekinah glory….so Mary was to carry within herself the Son of God, the glory of God’s people Israel (cf. Luke 2:28-32, esp., v. 32). Luke, like Matthew, is saying in effect that the conception of Jesus in the womb of the virgin Mary differs from all other conceptions of children by their mothers in that there was no human father. The place of the human father was taken by the Spirit of God, by God Himself….This is an incredible mystery. In a sense the overshadowing of Mary hides from view the details of this divine activity. No one can penetrate more deeply into this enigmatic event than the text will allow. Matthew and Luke say just so much and no more…..setting in motion all the processes necessary to bring into being the full humanity of Jesus.”[4]

 The Holy Spirit Consecrated Jesus  

What is the relationship between the Spirit’s work of creation in the conception of Christ and Him being called the Son of God? Did the miracle in the womb of Mary constitute Him as the Son of God, just declare Him to be the Son of God, or declare the Son of God born of Mary to be holy? A literal translation of Luke 1:35c would read: “….on which account also the one conceived holy will be called Son of God.” 

Because of what was stated in 35a & b, the child conceived, and referred to in 35c, is described by the adjective holy and named as Son of God. What is the relationship between the Holy Spirit coming upon Mary and His being holy, the Son of God? 

The passage cannot be saying that Jesus became the Son of God because of His miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit. This is similar to the view that Jesus was adopted as Son of God at His baptism. Father and Son are revealed in the Bible in an eternal relationship. Jesus’ sonship did not have its beginning at the incarnation, otherwise, what would Jesus have been before the incarnation? He became a man and as man He was the Son of Man and the Son of God. 

The passage is describing the incarnation of the eternal Son of God. This child was born holy. Holy denotes consecration and separation to God. From the inception of His conception He was set apart for God.  

The Holy Spirit was the energizing factor by which Jesus was conceived within the virgin-womb of Mary; the Holy Spirit was that divine creative element by which the fashioning of Jesus’ humanity was begun……the humanity that was so carefully and uniquely generated by the Holy Spirit, was the very humanness that the eternal Son made his own and within which he became incarnate – words of the Psalmist placed in the mouth of Jesus: “Sacrifices and offerings You O God have not desired, but a body You have prepared for Me” (Heb. 10:5)……Luke 1:35……Matt. 1:23……..seem to be saying that the Holy Spirit created the humanity that the Eternal Son made His very own, within which He completely immersed Himself.[5] 

How do we understand this new life in the womb of Mary as holy? “The quality of hagion (holiness) is to be attached to Jesus precisely because His conception and birth was the result of the creative activity of the Holy Spirit….because He was conceived by the Holy Spirit. But what did Luke mean when he wrote that Jesus would be holy?”[6]           

Holy means that Jesus is the Anointed One; the Messiah, Savior, and Deliverer. 

We can see David, God’s anointed, having the oil poured upon Him: “I have found David My servant; With My holy oil I have anointed him” (Psalm 89:20). The Apostles preached Christ as “Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed…” (Acts 4:27).

Holy means that Jesus is divine.  

He is the eternal Son of God who become a man, by means of conception in the womb of the virgin Mary by the Holy Spirit’s causation. The eternal Son is God and God is holy. The child, therefore, is holy because He is divine. Philip Hughes says:

 The nativity was not the beginning of the Son’s existence, but an event, a becoming, in his eternal existence. That is why it is said that the Word, who is God, became flesh (Jn. 1:1, 14), that he became in the likeness of man (Phil. 2:7), and that he came from a woman (Gal. 4:4). The virgin birth of Jesus, then, is God in action uniting the human and the divine in the one theanthropic person of the incarnate Son. Accordingly, Ignatius, writing early in the second century, spoke of Jesus Christ as Son of Mary and Son of God, as generate and ingenerate.[7] 

Holy means that He is full of the Holy Spirit.  

If this could be spoken of John in Luke 1:15 – “and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb…”- surely it would apply to Jesus in a much greater way. Certain statements made of John’s life in the birth narrative of Luke also apply to Jesus.

Holy means that He is sinless. 

This is so only in His case. Man can be holy through grace, but not sinless. But when we speak of Jesus as “Holy Child of Bethlehem,” we mean sinlessness and nothing less than that. 

John Owen refers Isa. 11:1-3 to the conception of Jesus: “His first sanctifying work in the womb is principally intended: for these expressions, “a rod out of the stem of Jesse,” and “a Branch out of his roots,” with respect whereunto the Spirit is said to be communicated unto him, do plainly regard his incarnation; and the soul of Christ, from the first moment of its infusion, was a subject capable of a fullness of grace, as unto its habitual residence and in-being, though the actual exercise of it was suspended for a while, until the organs of the body were fitted for it. This, therefore, it received by this first unction of the Spirit. Hence, from His conception, he was holy.” (emphasis mine)[8] 

But why is He sinless? Was it merely because He did not have a human father? Are we to view His sinlessness as the result of no transmission of a sin nature through the Father? Hughes is helpful in answering these questions. 

There is, however, no justification for concluding, as did some of the patristic authors, that the virginity of Mary was the source of the sinlessness of Jesus…..The biblical account of the nativity clearly attributes the holiness of the child borne by Mary not to her virginity but to the sanctifying operation of the Holy Spirit” (Luke 1:35).[9] 

Holy means that He is a new creature, a new man, the true man. 

God created Adam from the dust of the earth and breathed into Him the breath of life. But He did not create the child Jesus from the inanimate creation and breathe into Him. Instead, He set in motion the processes of human formation in the womb of Mary in an invisible and mysterious way. It is clearly the creation of a new man (it would not be right to say a new type of man, because Jesus was a real man), but the true man. Philip Hughes again: 

….man is the focal point of redemption….the reconciliation of man to his Creator means also the restoration of the whole creation and the realization of the destiny for which he and it were always intended. The fundamental requirement for the achievement of this end is the reintegration within man of the image of God at the heart of his being, and this is necessarily effected through the Second Person of the Holy Trinity for the reason that he himself is the Image after whom man was created. There is, as we have shown earlier, a special line of affinity that links the Son of God to our humanity – a line which, though it in no way nullifies the absolute ontological transcendence of the Creator over the creature, does establish an association that is unique to man in the ontological sphere of creation, and that points to the possibility of the incarnation, the becoming man, of the Image himself in whom man has been formed……The truth that lies behind this double linkage is, first of all, that man is God’s creature; secondly, that man alone of God’s creatures is formed in the image of God; and thirdly, that the eternal Son is the Image in accordance with which man was formed.[10]  

The incarnation of the Son effected the transfer of our origin into himself, “so that we may no longer as mere earth return to earth, but as being joined to the Word from heaven may be carried up to heaven by Him.”[11] 

What then was the role of the Holy Spirit in the conception of Jesus? Jesus is of and from the Holy Spirit; He is holy Spirit, though conceived in the womb of a sinful woman. This conception is so utterly extraordinary in the life and history of sinful man that Luke described it as an overpowering and subduing of humanity in history’s most astonishing and majestic victory of the Spirit of God in overturning human sin. “O come let us adore Him,” “incarnate Deity,” the Spirit, who “abhors not the virgin’s womb,” who comes to overshadow Mary and favor her to bear the “holy child” Jesus, “who will save His people from their sins.” 

John Reuther, Interim Pastor, Providence Reformed Baptist Church, Warminster, PA 

[2]  Quoted in Hawthorne, The Presence & The Power, 65. 

[3] Hawthorne, The Presence & The Power, 71.

[4] Ibid., 72. 

[5] Hawthorne, The Presence & The Power, 79.

[6] Ibid., 81.

[7] Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, The True Image (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans; IVP, 1989), 216.

[8] John Owen, The Works of John Owen, Christian Library Series (AGES Software Library®, LLC.), Volumes 3 & 4 on the Holy Spirit, from the 16 Volume Series, 211.

[9] Philip Edgcumbe Hughes, The True Image (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans; IVP, 1989), 217, 218. 

[10] Hughes, Image, 213.

[11] Hughes, Image, 286.

The traditional Christmas story is well known to most Christians. But the question is whether the traditional story is biblically and historically accurate in every point. The Bible is inerrant and we are not questioning the accuracy of the biblical narratives of the Nativity of our Lord. 

Biblical scholar Kenneth E. Bailey has written a magnificent book entitled Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels (2008). In the first chapter of this book, Dr. Bailey presents a convincing case for the historical inaccuracy of certain features of the traditional Christmas story. Dr. Bailey lived in the Middle East from 1935-1995. He spent 40 of those years teaching New Testament in seminaries and institutes in Egypt, Lebanon, Jerusalem and Cyprus. He has spent his academic efforts trying to understand more adequately the narratives of the Gospels in the light of Middle Eastern culture. In this article I would like to introduce you to Dr. Bailey’s analysis of the story of Jesus’ birth found in Luke 2:1-20. You may be surprised to learn that some of the features of the traditional Christmas story are inaccurate. But do not be unsettled, because Dr. Bailey sheds a clarifying new light on the Christmas story. 

The Traditional Story  

Here are samples of the Christmas story from two internet websites. 

“At last Mary and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem. It was crowded with other people who needed to pay their taxes. Mary was very tired and needed a place to stay. At each inn, the story was the same. There was no room for them. Eventually, one kind innkeeper said he had a stable where he kept his animals. They were welcome to stay there. And so it was that a few hours later, Mary gave birth to her son in that stable. She wrapped Jesus in strips of cloth and laid Him in a manger full of hay.” 

“When Joseph and Mary arrived in Bethlehem there were no rooms left in the Inns because the town was very busy.  They were worried because they had nowhere to sleep and Mary was tired because the journey had been long and dusty. She felt sore from riding on a donkey. But a kind innkeeper said they could shelter in the Inn manger, where animals like sheep were kept overnight to stop them from straying. Mary knew the baby would be born soon, so she was very glad to be able to rest in the manger.  The manger was a small room like a cellar at the bottom of the Inn.  It was strewn with straw for the animals and the animals made friends with Mary and Joseph who settled down for the night as best they could. In the night Mary had her baby.” 

Problems 

Dr. Bailey points out that the traditional understanding of the account in Luke 2:2-18 contains a number of critical flaws.[1] 

Joseph Son of Levi  

The first flaw in the account is that Joseph was returning to the village of his origin. Bailey says “In the Middle East, historical memories are long, and the extended family, with its connection to its village of origin, is important. In such a world a man like Joseph could have appeared in Bethlehem and told people, ‘I am Joseph son of Heli, son of Matthat, the son of Levi’ and most homes in town would be open to him.” 

Joseph of the Family of David 

The second flaw that Bailey mentions is that Joseph was from the family of King David, and that the family of David was so famous in Bethlehem that local people apparently called the town the “City of David.” The official name of the village was Bethlehem. Of course, Jerusalem was called the “City of David” too (Lk. 2:4). Again Bailey asserts: “Being of that famous family, Joseph would have been welcome anywhere in town.” 

Sense of Honor in Bethlehem 

The third flaw is that “In every culture a woman about to give birth is given special attention…. Are we to imagine that Bethlehem was an exception? Was there no sense of honor in Bethlehem? Surely the community would have sensed its responsibility to help Joseph find adequate shelter for Mary and provide the care she needed. To turn away a descendent of David in the ‘City of David’ would be an unspeakable shame on the entire village.” 

Relatives Nearby 

Fourth, “Mary had relatives in a nearby village. A few months prior to the birth of Jesus, Mary had visited her cousin Elizabeth ‘in the hill country of Judea’ and was welcomed by her. Bethlehem was located in the center of Judea. By the time, therefore, that Mary and Joseph arrived in Bethlehem they were but a short distance from the home of Zechariah and Elizabeth. If Joseph had failed to find shelter in Bethlehem he would naturally have turned to Zechariah and Elizabeth. But did he have time for those few extra miles?” 

Time to Prepare 

Finally, “Joseph had time to make adequate arrangements. Luke 2:4 says that Joseph and Mary ‘went up from Galilee to Judea,’ and verse 6 states ‘while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered’ (KJV). The average Christian thinks that Jesus was born the same night the holy family arrived – hence Joseph’s haste and willingness to accept any shelter, even the shelter of a stable. Traditional Christmas pageants reinforce this idea year after year.” 

Cultural Help for Reforming the Traditional Story 

Dr. Bailey says, that “Joseph was not obliged to seek a commercial inn. He does not appear as an inept and inadequate husband who cannot arrange for Mary’s needs. Likewise, Joseph did not anger his wife’s relatives by failing to turn to them in a crisis. The child was born in the normal surroundings of a peasant home sometime after they arrived in Bethlehem, and there was no heartless innkeeper with whom to deal. A member of the house of David was not humiliated by rejection as he returned to the village of his family’s origins. The people of Bethlehem offered the best they had and preserved their honor as a community. The shepherds were not hardhearted oafs without the presence of mind to help a needy family and strangers.”[3] 

There are two questions to consider: Where was the manger? and What was the Inn? Luke seems very interested in telling his readers where Mary laid the baby Jesus, in a manger, and gives the reason that there was a lack of space in the lodgings. Raymond Brown notes: “The precise picture that he wishes to convey is not clear; but the details about the swaddling in the manger are repeated later (vss. 12, 16) and must be of significance. Most of the popular reflection on verse 7, however, misses Luke’s purpose. Certainly irrelevant are speculations about why there was no room at the lodgings (influx of people for the census; presence of soldiers who took the census inscriptions; etc.), especially when the speculations lead to homilies about the supposed heartlessness of the unmentioned innkeeper and the hardship of the situation for the impoverished parents.”[1] But Kenneth Bailey offers some helpful insights. 

Middle-Eastern Houses 

The traditional Christmas story portrays Christ lying in the manger (feeding trough) of a stable or a barn. This barn is typically portrayed as being outside of a commercial inn. Darrell Bock points out that “katalyma suggests that a formal inn is not in view here….. Luke 22:11 uses the term of a guest room in a house, while Lk. 10:34 uses pandochion to describe a formal inn….. the Christmas associations of and inn and an innkeeper, however, do not reflect the language of Luke’s text.”[2] And Raymond Brown comments on the association of the commercial inn in these words: “The public inns of the time should not be pictured as snug or comfortable according to medieval or modern standards. They were closer to a type of khan or caravansary where large groups of travelers found shelter under one roof; the people slept on cots or on a terrace elevated by a few steps from the floor, with the animals on the floor in the same room……. unfortunately, the thesis that katalyma means ‘inn’ is not helped by Luke 10:34; for there the inn on the road to Jericho where the Samaritan put up the ravaged traveler is called a pandochion, not a katalyma…..”[3]   

Where was the Manger? 

Dr. Bailey points out that in traditional Middle Eastern villages the word manger does not invoke the idea of a stable or a barn. “Simple village homes in Palestine often had but two rooms. One was exclusively for guests. That room could be attached to the end of the house or be a prophet’s chamber on the roof, as in the story of Elijah (1 Kings 17:19). The main room was a family room where the entire family cooked, ate, slept, and lived. The end of the room, next to the door, was either a few feet lower than the rest of the floor or blocked off with heavy timbers. Each night into that designated area, the family cow, donkey, and a few sheep would be driven. And every morning the same animals were taken out and tied up in the courtyard of the house. The animal stall would then be cleaned for the day. Such simple homes can be traced from the time of David up to the middle of the 20th century. I’ve seen them both in Upper Galilee and in Bethlehem.”[4] 

We are well aware that Middle-Eastern houses have flat roofs and sometimes a guestroom was built on the top of the house. But the guestroom was also attached to the end of the house. And as far as the animals are concerned, “the farmer wants the animals in the house each night because they provide heat in winter and are safe from theft. The elongated circles represent mangers dug out of the lower end of the living room. The family living room has a slight slope in the direction of the animal’s stall, which aids in sweeping and washing. Dirt and water naturally move downhill into the space for the animals and can be swept out the door. If the family cow is hungry during the night, she can stand up and eat from mangers cut out of the floor of the living room. Mangers for sheep can be of wood and placed on the floor of the lower level. This style of traditional home fits naturally into the birth story of Jesus.”[6] 

Biblical Support 

In 1 Samuel 28:8, Saul went to the house of a medium at Endor. As the story unfolds, Saul became terrified by the words of Samuel whom he saw in this disturbing séance. The woman desired to set bread and food before Saul that he might eat and have strength to go on his way (v. 22). Then verse 24 says: “the woman had a fattened calf in the house, and she quickly slaughtered…..” 

The story of Jephthah in Judges 11:29-40 is also enlightening. Jephthah made his vow assuming that an animal would first come through the door of his house. 

Bailey points out that “these same simple houses also appear in the New Testament. In Matthew 5:14-15, Jesus says, ‘No one after lighting a lamp puts it under a bushel, but on a stand, and it gives light to all in the house.’ Obviously, Jesus is assuming a typical village home with one room. If a single lamp sheds light on everybody in the house, a house can only have one room. Another example appears in Luke 13:10-17 where on the Sabbath Jesus healed a woman who was bent over and could not fully straighten herself. Jesus said…you are freed from your infirmity. The head of the synagogue was angry because Jesus had worked on the Sabbath. Jesus responded, ‘You hypocrites! Does not each of you on the Sabbath untie his ox or his donkey from the manger, and lead it away to water it (v. 15)….. Clearly, Jesus knew that every night his opponents had at least an ox or a donkey in their houses”[7] 

Modern Scholarship 

The one room village home with mangers has been noted by modern scholars as well. William Thompson, an Arabic-speaking Presbyterian missionary scholar of the mid-19th century observed the village homes in Bethlehem and wrote, “It is my impression that the birth actually took place in an ordinary house of some common peasant, and that the baby was laid in one of the mangers, such as are still found in the dwellings of farmers in this region.”[8] 

“The Anglican scholar E. F. F. Bishop, who lived in Jerusalem from 1922 to 1950 wrote: ‘Perhaps….. recourse was had to one of the Bethlehem houses with the lower section provided for the animals, with mangers hollowed in stone, the dais being reserved for the family. Such a manger being immovable, filled with crushed straw, would do duty for a cradle.”[9] 

What is the Inn? 

Bailey asserts that “For more than 100 years scholars resident in the Middle East have understood Luke 2:7 as referring to a family room with mangers cut into the floor at one end. If this interpretation is pursued, there remains the question of the identity of the ‘inn.’ What precisely was it that was full?”[10] 

An important question is asked in this treatment of the story of Jesus’ birth. Because most English versions state that after the child was born, he was laid in a manger because there was no room for them in the end, the conclusion is usually drawn that they were rejected by the people of Bethlehem. Was this really the case? The phrase “no room in the inn” has come to mean that the inn had a number of rooms and all of them were occupied: “No Vacancy,” therefore, is what Joseph and Mary were told, in this view. 

This question revolves around the use of two Greek words: pandochion (Lk. 10:34), and katalyma (Lk. 2:7). It is the pandochion that refers to the commercial inn, and not the katalyma of Luke 2:7.  Bailey states “If Luke expected his readers to think Joseph was turned away from an inn he would have used the word pandochion.”[11] 

“Literally, a katalyma is simply ‘a place to stay’ and can refer to many types of shelters. The three that are options for this story are inn, (the English translation tradition), house (the Arabic biblical tradition of more than 1000 years), and guest room (Luke’s choice). Luke used this key term katalyma on one other occasion in his gospel, where it is defined in the text itself. In Luke 22 Jesus tells his disciples: ‘Behold, when you have entered the city, a man carrying a jar of water will meet you; follow him into the house which he enters, and tell the householder, the teacher says to you: where is the guest room (katalyma) where I am to eat the Passover with my disciples?’ Here, the key word katalyma is…..an upper room which is clearly a guest room in a private home. This precise meaning makes perfect sense when applied to the birth story. In Luke 2:7 Luke tells his readers that Jesus was placed in a manger (in the family room) because in that home the guest room was already full. If at the end of Luke’s Gospel, the word katalyma means a guestroom attached to a private home (22:11), why would it not have the same meaning near the beginning of his gospel?”[12] 

Modern Scholarship 

Bailey points out that Alfred Plummer, in his ICC Commentary on Luke, wrote: “It is a little doubtful whether the familiar translation ‘in the inn’ is correct…. it is possible that Joseph had relied upon the hospitality of some friend in Bethlehem, whose ‘guest chamber’ however, was already full when he and Mary arrived.”[13] I. Howard Marshall “makes the same observation but does not expand on its significance. Fitzmyer calls the katalyma a ‘lodge,’ which for him is a ‘public caravansary or khan.’ I am convinced that Plummer was right.”[14] 

The Reformed Story Summarized 

Here is Dr. Bailey’s “reformed” telling of the story of Jesus’ birth: “But part of what Luke tells us about the birth of Jesus is that the holy family traveled to Bethlehem, where they were received into a private home. The child was born, wrapped and (literally) ‘put to bed’ (anaklino) in the living room in the manger that was either built into the floor or made of wood and moved into the family living space. Why weren’t they invited into the family guestroom, the reader might naturally ask? The answer is that the guestroom was already occupied by other guests. The host family graciously accepted Mary and Joseph into the family room of their house. The family room would, naturally, be cleared of men for the birth of the child, and the village midwife and other women would have assisted at the birth. After the child was born and wrapped, Mary put her newborn son to bed in a manger filled with fresh straw and covered him with a blanket. When Jesus engaged in ministry as an adult ‘The common people heard him gladly’ (Mk. 12:37). That same acceptance was evident at his birth.”[15] 

Remodeling our Nativity Scenes 

When I first read this book a little over a year ago, I was so excited about Dr. Bailey’s insights into the story of Jesus’ birth. I shared them with my wife and family, and they too were very interested. But then we discussed our Fontanini nativity scene that we put up in our house each year and wondered what kind of modifications might be needed to it. Well, I think we need “reformed nativity scenes.” Truly, if Dr. Bailey’s biblical and cultural insights represent what really happened, then all we would need to do is have a nativity scene depicting a simple middle eastern house with the guestroom and stable, and place Mary and Joseph and the baby Jesus there in the living quarters of that simple house with Jesus lying in the manger. And we would know that Joseph and Mary were well cared for in Bethlehem showed Him the honor due to Him, even at the time of His birth. 

Pastor John Reuther – Covenant Baptist Church, Lumberton, NJ; Reformed Baptist Seminary, Easely, SC. 

The diagram shown above is used with the permission of IVP Publishers who asked that the following information be posted here:   

http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/code=2568  

Taken from Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes: Cultural Studies in the Gospels by Kenneth E. Bailey. Copyright(c) 2008 by Kenneth E. Bailey. Used by permission of InterVarsity Press PO Box 1400 Downers Grove, IL 60515. www.ivpress.com.  

 http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/book.pl/code=2568   

[2] Darrell Bock, Luke 1:1 – 9:50 Baker Exegetical Commentary on the NT (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1994), p. 208. 

[3] Brown, p. 400. 

[4] Bailey, p. 29. 

[6] Bailey, p. 29, 30. 

[7] Ibid., p. 30, 31. 

[8] William Thompson, The Land and the Book (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1954), p. 645. 

[9] Bailey, p. 31. 

[10] Ibid., p. 31. 

[11] Ibid., p. 32. 

[12] Ibid., p. 32, 33. 

[13] Bailey, p. 33. 

[14] Ibid., 33. 

[15] Ibid. p. 34, 35. 

Pastor John Reuther – Providence Reformed Baptist Church, Warminster, PA

[1] The five points that follow are from Kenneth E. Bailey, Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2008), 25, 26. 

[2] Ibid., 36. 

[3] Ibid., 36