Comments from God

Comments by God

Young men and women always like to be called as beautiful or handsome or a good person or something else, and so they do whatever they can to get a good impression in schools, colleges or even working places. As Bible is of the opinion that God looks into the hearts of the people than the physical appearance of the people and on that basis He comments about his creations. Unsurprisingly, it is amazing to say that God comments. Hence, YAHWEH not only created everything in and around the world but also commented about His creation. Without forgetting we have to put into consideration that it is God who introduced Himself as ‘I am who I am’ which describes eternal power, unchanging character and absolute over everything. Here are the few examples in the Bible where God commented about His creation.

Creation: In Gen. 1:31; “God saw all that he had made, and it was very good”. It is the first time in the bible where God commented about His creation. In the creation account God created everything by His Word, but He created man in a unique way and so when He looked at His creations and saw, He commented ‘it is very good’.     

Noah: When looked into further chapters of the Genesis it can seen in the time of Noah where God again comments about His creation, in Gen 6: 7-8, it is read that He was grieved by seeing the evil of the world. But that verse didn’t end there, it further says that but Noah found favor in the eye of God. When we see the history of Noah, there was a reason for him to find favor in the eye of God, which is mention in Gen. 6:9 “Noah was righteous, blameless among the people of his time and he walked with God”. The negative aspect of the comment is the about the people in the time of Noah, because of whom God was grieved.     

Abraham: When comes to Gen. 15:6, Abraham was credited as the righteous by seeing his faith by God. The history of Abraham shows that Abraham was the first person who can be called as a first Jew who can be understood as a person who just obeyed God without having a second thought. His faith was further mentioned as an example in NT by Paul and other authors of NT.      

David: When looked into the history of King David, he was commented as the man after God’s own heart, there is a peculiarity about King David, and he was commented before he became the king of Israel that means at his young age itself he was commented by God. When looked at the history of David he was the person who obeyed God in every circumstance.    

Job: When it comes to the life of Job, he was commented as, “there is no one like him in the earth, upright, man who fear God and shuns evil” (Job 1:8). When looked into the life of Job, he is recognized as the man of suffering, even in his suffering he did not deny God but instead left everything to the will of the God. 

John: And when looked into NT, it was John was called as the beloved disciple of Jesus. He was the disciple who was very close to the Jesus. It is said that it was John whom Jesus gave his mother to be his mother at the time of his death on cross.

Conclusion  

            There are many examples in the bible about God commenting his creation. In these above people the commonality is that they were righteous even though many of them failed in many of their situation or circumstances of their life, like King David in the episode of Bathsheba or Abraham who doubted God in the episode sleeping with Hagar. What is the comment of God about us? We are also like the Noah, Abraham, David, Job and John, called separated for His purpose, what is his comment about us? It is easy to fool man but we cannot fool God, we can show something outside and have something else inside. These people were righteous even when they had weakness and even failures in their life but they were able to rectify their failures and even certain level of their weakness. Jacob Isaac, urban youth worker says, “Life is not what you are not but what you are and God uses what you are.” When comes to the serving God or obeying His commandments human weaknesses or failures does not come into consideration because our God is above all the weaknesses and failures. What is God’s comment about you by looking your life?  

CHURCH, as the Body of Christ

Introduction

            The most famous metaphor for church is ‘the Body of Christ’. The church as the body of Christ is familiar picture in the NT. Paul used this phrase in his Epistles like Romans, Corinthians, Ephesians and Colossians. The concept of church as the body of Christ is the message of all time and therefore, author is trying to deal with the brief Definition of the church and its understandings and Body of Christ with its meanings, nature and understandings of the Pauline epistles and various viewpoints and issues.    

  

1. Definition of the church

The Greek word used for Church is ‘ekklesia’, and Paul used ekklesia in his epistles. The term ekklesia is derived from the Old Testament, where the people of Israel were the ‘qahal Yahweh’ (e.g. Num.16:3, 20:4; Deut.23: 1, 8:8) or ‘qahal Israel’ (e.g. Ex.12: 6; Lev. 16:17; Num. 14:5). Paul often used the Phrase Church of God that is ‘ekklesia kyriou’ (e.g. 1 Cor.1:2, 10:32, 11:2; 2 Cor.1:1; 1 Thess: 2:14). (Schreiner, p 331) The word ekklesia also emphasized the church gathered, just as the term in Old Testament is used when Israel gathered together (Ex.12:6, Lev.16:17; Num.14:5; Deut. 31:30; Josh. 8:35; I Kings.8:14, 22, 55). So church can be defined as gathering together of the believers even when such an idea is not specifically stated. (Schreiner, 333)

2. Understandings about the Church

There is a traditional understanding of the Church which can be understood in two different aspects that is visible church and invisible church. 

            2.1. Visibility of the church

The visible church can be said as the physical or seen institution or the organization. The visible is the church which consists of all who are enrolled as church members. It is not difficult to determine who they are, for their names appear on the registers of churches. There can be born again church members but at the same time can be nominal Christians. With little effort an accurate count of them can be made. The membership of the visible church coincides with that of the invisible church. (Kuiper, 26)

            2.2. Invisibility of the church

The invisible church is the church which is a spiritual church which cannot be seen by our naked eyes. This church consists exclusively of those who by grace of the Holy Spirit have been born again or it consists of solely of regenerated persons. Together the members of the invisible church constitute the Body of Christ. (Kuiper, 27-28)    

3. Body of Christ    

3.1. Meaning of Body of Christ

            Paul has given something more than the sum of the believers in one place. He is speaking of an ‘Organic Unity’, in which Christians not only belong to the Christ and to one another within their body, they also bide in Christ and find life in Christ. (Watson, 96) The Greek word used for the Body of Christ is ‘to soma tou christou’. The equivalent expression includes ‘the body of the Lord’, ‘his body of flesh’, and ‘his glorious body’. (Hawthorne, 76)     

3.2. Nature of Body of Christ

The body of Christ concept is plainly not used allegorically in I Corinthians 12, for instance, different parts of the body do not represent different individuals or sections of the Corinthian church. The Phrase ‘body of Christ’ is used realistically, ontologically and metaphorically or symbolically or analogically. Most of the scholars like Schweitzer have a realistic understanding by consider the concept as the corporeal union with the risen Christ. J.A.T. Robinson, for whom the church is identified as literally the resurrected body of Christ, these understanding ignores Paul’s careful distinction between Christ’s resurrection and the believer’s resurrection in future. Therefore, the protestant interpretation of the Body concept is Metaphysical not literally and biologically or mystically.  (Hawthorne, 78)         

3.3. Understandings in the Pauline Epistles

            Two stages can be distinguished in Paul’s use of the body conception reference to the church. It is used as the simile in I Corinthians and Romans (Church like a body of Christ) and as a metaphor in Colossians and Ephesians (Church as the body which Christ as the Head). 

3.3.1. Romans and Corinthians 

In Romans 12:3 believers are admonished that everyone is to know his own place in the church as a whole, and this is elucidated with the figure of the body in which have many members and in which does not have the same function. In moving little more further the body mentioned in I Cor. 12:14 is to the same effect. There too is the question of one body and the function is different. The true nature of the body is expounded in its unity and diversity in the Corinthians and the Romans with continuous indirect application to the church. In these books it is beyond the mutual understanding of the unity and diversity of the church that is elucidated and commanded under the figure human body; throw necessary light on the mutual cooperation within a specific community. Paul, by saying church as the body of Christ he meant the ‘belonging to Christ’.  (Ridderbos, 369-370)        

In Romans 12 and I Corinthians 12, it is said that body has many members but all the members do not have same functioning, so also believers are one body in Christ but individually member one of another. Paul is saying here that church is not the body of Christ in its existence as community but precisely from Christ and from the bond that joins the church to him. In other words Paul in the epistle of Romans and Corinthians is trying to say that,

·         The designation of the church as the body of Christ does not intend in the first place to qualify its mutual unity and diversity, but to denote its unity in and with Christ.

·         This unity of the church with Christ thus qualifies has its real ground neither in the spiritual indwelling of Christ in church, nor in the thought that the Spirit constitutes the communion between Christ and the church, but in the church belonging to Christ in the redemptive-historical sense, in the inclusion of ‘the many in the one’.

·         In virtue of this common belonging to and inclusion of the many in Christ, individual believers are qualified as members of Christ and the church as his body.  Church is related to the communion with the blood and body of Christ exercised in the Lord’s Supper. Therefore, the concept Church as the body of Christ has figurative and metaphorical significance. However the unity and the communion with Christ are expressed thereby.

·         This communion and the unity of Christ is represented by the  sacraments  like Baptism and the Lord’s supper and so church  as the Body pf Christ can be revealed only in virtue of the gift of the Holy Spirit given by him to his body. (Ridderbos, 375-376)

3.3.2. Ephesians and Colossians

             In Ephesians and Colossians there is an advance in Paul’s thought, involving the setting forth of the relationship which the church, as the body of Christ, bears to Christ as head of the body (Eph. 5:22-33). The church as the body of Christ occupies a highly significant role in the purposes of God. This brought out particularly in Ephesians 1:23 where it is asserted that Christ’s rule over all things are for, or on behalf of, church, at Ephesians 3:10 where it is stated that through the church the wisdom of God is made known even to the cosmic powers. The headship of the Christ over the church is presented in terms of an organic relationship in which he exercise control over His people as the head of the body exercises the control over its various parts. The living relationship between the members is kept in view, while the dependence of the members on Christ for life and power, as well as his supremacy, is reiterated. The element of the body’s growth is made plain in Colossians 2:19 and even more so in Ephesians. Its upbuilding is mentioned in the context of unity in diversity; such a growth derives from Christ and leads to Christ as members are rightly related to him as the head and to one another (Eph. 4:1-16). The church as the body of Christ is described in Christ fullness. In one sense it is complete, for it is already a body just as there is already a Lord (Eph. 4:4-6). On the other hand it grows and will be completed on the final day. The body thus partakes of the tensions regularly seen in the NT between the ‘already’ and ‘not yet’ between what it is and what it will be. The body of Christ is a present reality and yet it is an eschatological, that is, future, entity. (Hawthorne, 79-80)  

  

4. Various viewpoints and Issues

The qualification of the church as the body of Christ is a denotation of the special, close relationship and communion that exist between the Christ and His church. Some have been of the opinion that church as the body of Christ is of the relationship of believers to one another. When Paul in his letters mentions about the church as the body of Christ took the figure from the Greek world, as the communal in the state and the society was spoken of under the figure of the body (Watson, 96). However, most of the scholars in the opinion that Paul’s meaning is by the concept ‘Body of Christ’ but it qualifies not only the fellowship of believers, but primarily the nature of the fellowship between the church and Christ himself. There are two senses given to the Body of Christ that is the metaphysical-collective sense and the real personal sense. (Richards, 81-82)

            4.1. Metaphysical sense

The qualification of the body of Christ is a figurative representation of the vital communion of the church with Christ. There are two different interpretations of the figurative view of body. They are as follows.

In the first interpretation, it is characteristic of the protestant traditional conception that body of Christ is here exclusively understood of the pneumatic mode of existence of the church on the ground of its communion with the exalted Christ. It is the spirit who constitutes this communion. The church is the body of Christ as the fellowship in which he dwells by his spirit and which he by his spirit enlivens and fills. In this context the body of Christ is accordingly often spoken of as the invisible church and mystical union between Christ and the church. (Ridderbos, 363)

In the second interpretation Roman Catholic tradition is considered. In Roman Catholic tradition, Church as the body of Christ is not thought pneumatically but as the fruit of the union of the church with the divine- human nature of the Christ. According to the Roman Catholic understanding, church receives in the Eucharist a share of as the Body of the Lord. The church indeed united with the body of God is understood in the literal sense for e.g. in the Eucharist. (Ridderbos, 364)

Therefore, we cannot say that these two interpretations are fundamentally different interpretation of the terminology of the ‘Body’. For both interpretation are significantly collective as a designation of the organic whole of the believers in their union with Christ but the difference lies in the manner in which the nature of the union is understood.

            4.2. Real Personal Sense

In real personal sense are something which is developed in the 1967 and again there are many interpretations, and they are as follows.

Some of the church as the body of Christ is the expression of the Body of Christ on the analogy of anthropology understood in a dichotomistic sense. The church is the Body of Christ because Christ constitutes it by his Spirit and enlivens it by his indwelling. This is a representation of the relationship of Body and soul. And this opinion is entirely foreign to the Paul. There is also an another interpretation that Church as the body of Christ that as church takes the Eucharist the Christian community feeds on this body and blood (that is on the basis when Jesus says, “this is my body…..my blood,” he said thereby transmit himself that is his actual self, his life and personality), becomes the very life and personality of the risen Lord. In a way to substantiate the point’s theologians are in view that Saul met the body of the Christ (i.e. the whole Christian community) on the road of Damascus. (Ridderbos, 366)

Evaluation

            The unity of the church was the problem of the first century churches like Corinth, Rome, Ephesus and Colossi and by the concept Church as the body of Christ; Paul is trying to bring unity in the church by explaining the spiritual aspect of the church. He was very much clear in making sense to his audience by presenting this concept about the church. This message of Paul is not at all irrelevant message for the Christian church even today but is very much relevant in today’s Church which is lacking the unity and love among each other and the relation with Christ.  

Conclusion

             Watson States that church as the body of Christ is to be in subjection to the Head, experience unity with the Head, Work in glad service for the Head, and Take Direction from The Head. (Watson, 98) Therefore, author wants to conclude church as the body of Christ made the audience of the Paul easy to understand and the issue on which Paul discusses about the concept of the Body of Christ is very much relevant issue even in the 21^st century church. So, the description of Watson about the body of Christ should be made practice in the church.

Reference List

Schreiner, Thomas R., 2005, ‘Paul- Apostle of God’s Glory in Christ’, Secunderabad: OM books.

Stedman, C. Ray, 1972, ‘Body Life’, USA: A Division of G/L Publication.

MacArthur, John Jr., 1973, ‘The Church’, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House.

Richards, Lawrence O., 1972, ‘A new Face for the church’, Michigan: Zondervam Publishing House

Ridderbos, Herman, 1975, ‘Paul- An outline of His theology’, Michigan: Eerdmans publishing company.   

Kuiper, R. B., 1967, ‘The Glorious Body of Christ’ London: The Banner of Truth Trust.

Hawthorne, Gerald F., Ralph P. Martin. Daniel G. Reid, 1993, ‘Dictionary of Paul and His Letters’, England: Intervarsity Press.

Watson, David, 1978, ‘I believe in the Church’, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.