What Changed?

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group Meeting January 8 to study 2 Samuel 4 (possibly 5).  Chapter 4 is another link in the story of David's kingdom being established.  In this chapter events are aligned which remove the remaining obstacles between David and the rest of Israel's tribes; at least the obvious ones.  The passage of time between the accounts is never reconciled, and doesn't seem to be important to the writer/editor.

Read through chapter 4 and 5 together.  We may start 5, but they belong together even if we do them separately.  Really chapters 1 through 5 belong together, and are referred to as the 'succession narrative'.  There's another 'succession narrative' with Solomon, but after that, they're either short or non-existent.  A 'succession narrative' shows the various hurdles overcome to establish a king on a throne.  This had to happen every time a king came to power, even in Judah, but we only have the details of David and Solomon.

Remember to take notes, jot down questions, and see what you can find to reconcile problems you find.  There are plenty of places where the text seems to show what happens, but doesn't explain inconsistencies.  They drive us crazy, but didn't seem to bother the initial audience, or detract from the point of the author/editor.

After reading through a few times on your own, and with your own questions/notes taken, read through again with the questions below:

Chapter 4

• Why do you think, if Ish-Bosheth was afraid of Abner, he 'looses courage' when Abner dies?  Why do you think he wasn't 'comforted'?
• All Israel is 'disturbed' when Abner dies.  What do you imagine might have been their greatest concerns or fears?
• Regardless of where "Beeroth" fell in the tribal regions of Israel, the point of the author/editor is that they are Benjamites.  Why do you think that would be important here?
• Why do you think Mephibosheth is mentioned here?  Different commentators have different ideas about it, but what do you think?
• In almost every translation, the deed of killing Ish-Bosheth is repeated.  If you have a New Living Translation, look at their wording for it.  The reason for the difference is that the NLT used the Greek text instead of the Hebrew at this point.  Keep in mind that the available Greek text is older than the Hebrew.  Which do you think is easier to explain as an 'editorial change', a duplication or a consistent story?
• The two brothers go to David as quickly as possible.  Yet David seems to know the details of Ish-Bosheth's death already.  So how do you think that happened?  What are some explanations you came up with or found in commentaries? (there aren't wrong answers here)
• David refers to the death of the Amalekite who announces Saul's death to him in Ziklag.  Do you think, considering how people in this story seem to know so much, these guys hadn't heard that particular one?
• Again David has someone kill the 'bearers of "good news"' in a way.  Why do you think he didn't do this with Joab when he killed Abner?  For some context here, read 1 Kings 2:5 and 6.  What do you think it is about Joab that 'protects' him from David?

Chapter 5

•  The elders of the all the tribes come to David, finally.  Considering what they say to him, why do you think it has taken them so long to come to David?  Who's death do you think really cinched it for them, Abner or Ish-Bosheth?
• They site the prophecy that David will shepherd Israel.  Where do you think they heard that?  Was Abner the first or was it widely distributed around prior?  There is a historical saying that the 'victors get to write the history'.  How much of that do you think might be happening here?
• After the elders make their statement, they make a covenant with David, and anoint him king over all Israel.  What do you think made up the covenant?  Was it a 'Bill of Rights' sort of thing or do you think it was what they were willing to do?  There's no record of it, so it's all guess.
• The timing issue comes up again.  Seven years and six months over Judah in Hebron, does that mean only Judah?  The impression this gives is that as soon as he was anointed king, he takes Jerusalem.  So, how does Ish-Bosheth only reign 2 years over all Israel while David reigns seven over all Judah?
• It says 'The king and his men' came to Jerusalem.  Some think this just means the 600 who followed David before he became king.  Some think it just refers to the army in general.  Why do you think it would be important for David to take Jerusalem without the help of the other tribes?
• The Jebusites are Caananite hold-outs against Israel, but also against the Philistines.  They are very confident in their city defenses.  What does David seem to know that other attackers don't?
• Verses 1 through 5 seem to establish that David is anointed (accepted by the other tribes, finally). Six through ten are the establishment of Jerusalem as his capital.  Eleven through sixteen are the establishment of his 'dwelling' and life there.  Why do you think this progression is so important to his ascension to the throne of Israel?  Why all the detail about his wives, concubines, and sons for instance?  The writer did this for Hebron too, so what do you think is the point?
• Seventeen through the rest of the chapter, is the defeat of the Philistines.  What do you think might be significant about the 'place' where they fight (The Valley of Raphaim)?  
• What, if anything, might be significant about 'all the Philistines' going up to fight David?
• In the first defeat of the Philistines, David takes spoils of idols.  Why do you think that might be significant?
• In the second defeat of the Philistines, they pursue them to their cities.  Why do you think the difference might be important?
• In both instances David inquires of God.  Each time he gets a different answer.  So how do you imagine this happening?  What does David do to inquire?
• The response the second time has some interesting detail.  What does this detail mean for the method David used to inquire?  How does this detail influence how you imagine David inquiring of God?
• David has success, lots of it.  Yet his victories still are due to his inquiry of God.  What does that say about our lives?  Do you see the value of knowing how David inquired of God?  How can we also inquire of God?

We'll focus on chapter 4 and see if we make it into 5.  See you all Thursday!

Revenge and Politics

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting December 18 to study 2 Samuel 3.  This chapter has lots of very peculiar elements in it.  Some of the high points are David able to make a covenant with Abner that will bring the other tribes over to him.  The low point is the murder of Abner.  How all this plays out is the makings of a good story or epic movie.

Read the chapter over several times.  You can read ahead as chapter 4 rounds out this part of David's story, and from there we take a very different turn.  As you read through this chapter be sure to jot down things that seem very odd, questions, and any observations about the story or wording.  And please bring those notes and questions to the group with you.

After you read through a few times, with your own notes and question, go back through with the questions below:

• It doesn't say how long the war between David and Ish-Bosheth lasted, but why do you think this is a good setup for what happens between Ish-Bosheth and Abner?
• Sons were born to David.  One commentator said there was something important about there only being one son to each wife.  Why do you think that would be important?  
• How do you think Abner might have been strengthening his position within the house of Saul, and why do you think he would do that if the 'house' is failing?
• Why do you think 'going in to' Saul's concubine would have been so serious?  Or was it serious since Ish-Bosheth only mentions it, and doesn't try to actually punish Abner?
• After strengthening himself in the house of Saul, consider how quickly he switches loyalty.  What do you imagine is going on with Abner at this point?  Do you think he's that erratic or is it just the story, or what?  What if he's actually quite clever?  What would these two elements (his strengthening his position, and then switching to David) mean if he were actually being very clever?
• Consider how he phrases his giving the kingdom to David in verse 9.  What then is known about David that we may have assumed was a private thing?
• If Abner knew that God promised the kingdom to David, why do you think he set up Saul's son in the first place?
• Ish-Bosheth is afraid of Abner, what do you think Ish-Bosheth believes will happen next, and why?
• Consider that Abner sends messengers to David, specifically on his own behalf, yet it's Ish-Bosheth that sends for Michal.  And then, when she comes, it's Abner who sends Paltiel away.  What do you think this means?  What do you think is going on here?
• After getting Michal, then Abner goes to the elders of Benjamin and Israel.  Why do you think it's so important to specify Benjamin here?
• After he's spoken to the elders Abner goes to Hebron with 20 men.  What do you think was on the list of things that Israel and Benjamin wanted to do, or is this just a way of referring to the people all wanting to make David king?
• Abner goes to assemble the people of Israel and after he leaves Joab shows up.  Considering that Joab returns from a very successful 'raid', how do you think he is feeling right now?
• Joab hears that Abner was here, and he goes to chew out the king.  Why do you think David puts up with Joab?
• Joab has Abner return and then kills him in the gate.  Consider that it also says that Abishai is also somehow involved.  Why do you think it might be significant that Abner dies in the gate?
• What does Joab claim was Abner's reason for coming to David?  How reasonable does this sound to you?
• When David hears of what Joab does he actually curses Joab and his family line.  Why so severe a response, yet David leaves Joab as 'general'?
• David tells Joab and his 'people' to mourn Abner, and then follows the mourning of David over Abner.  How authentic does David's response to Abner's death seem to you?
• Consider how the people, both local to David in Hebron/Judah and those of all Israel think of David's mourning over Abner.  They clearly thought he was being authentic.  Why would he be so adamant about how important Abner was to Israel?  How likely is it that Abner really was a quality guy and everyone simply saw that and acknowledged that in him?

 That should keep us busy for an hour or so.  Please be sure to bring your questions and observations.  There's lots of room for speculation, and sometimes getting us thinking about it opens us up to what the Spirit who inspired these things wants us to get from it.

Fun On The Hill And At The Pool

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting December 11 to study 2 Samuel 2.  This chapter has some odd elements in it.  The characters behave in odd ways, and the story is a bit odd or at least difficult to imagine.

Read through the chapter a few times.  Perhaps reading ahead would help gain some context.  As you read through, jot down observations, questions, and insights.  Look for elements that demonstrate the influence of God.  Sometimes they are more difficult to find than you would expect because you end up having to infer them.

After you've read through a few times, read back through with these questions:

• Why do you think David is inquiring of God at this point?  What is his circumstance?
• Consider God's answers.  Try and imagine the process to ask the questions from the answers.  What do you imagine is happening?
• Both Carmel and Jezreel are actually in Judean hills, but more famous places with these names are found in the north.  Why do you think it might matter that these wives are 'local'?
• Read 1 Samuel 30:26-31.  What influence do you think this had on the men anointing David as king?
• David finds out what the men of Jabesh-Gilead did for Saul and Jonathan, and sends a blessing to them.  Many commentators say this was 'shrewd' on David's part to gain support, but look at where Jabesh-Gilead is in relation to Judah (see map below).  What do you think are some other alternatives?
• Consider the content of David's message.  Why do you think David would want to 'bless' them and return their kindness onto them?
• Why do you think David mentions his 'kingship' in Judah?  Do you think he's being shrewd or do you think he's simply validating his ability or resources to bless/do kindness to Jabesh-Gilead?
• Abner becomes a character at the forefront of the story here.  Considering that Abner was Saul's uncle, why do you think he wouldn't simply try and become king?
• Look at 1 Chronicles 8:33.  Considering that 'Baal' was also a term for the Hebrew God early on, what is the difference between the names?  Look up the name in 1 Chronicles 8:33 here, and the name in 2 Samuel 2:8 here.  What do you think is important and meaningful in the difference?
• Find Mahanaim on the map below.  Why do you think it made sense to make the 'capital' there?  What do you think that says about the 'strength' of the new 'king & country'?
• If Ish-Bosheth was 40, why wasn't he at the battle, and how old was everyone else if he's the youngest?
• Ish-Bosheth reigned two years and David 7 in Hebron.  What do you think happened to the 5 years difference?
• There's no real explanation about how they meet up in Gibeon.  If you check commentaries and your study Bibles, there will be differing opinions.  Why do you think Abner wanted to turn it into a 'battle' of sorts?
• The 'battle' didn't end up going Abner's way.  Imagine how it begins, consider the wording and the explanation of the place-name, what do you think is the writer's point here in describing it as he does?
• Zeruiah was David's sister, and her three sons were part of David's warrior band, and Joab was his 'general'.  This is important for the next few chapters.  Why do you think, as fast as Asahel was, he couldn't catch the much older (like, well-over-60 older) Abner?  What do you think he was doing?
• Why doesn't Abner want to kill Asahel?  Remember that!
• How hard must they have been running for the butt-end of the spear to pass through Asahel?
• Everyone stops at the place where Asahel dies, except for his two brothers.  Why do you think they kept going?  Why do you think they really stopped when they did?
• Abner was the one who suggested the 'battle' in the first place.  Why do you think he would blame Joab for continuing it?
• Joab says he will stop because Abner said what he did.  What do you think are some other reasons he would stop the pursuit?
• Consider how long Abner and his men walk (v.29).  Then consider how much Joab and the people accomplished in the same time.  Look at the map below.  Who traveled further?
• Consider the huge difference in how many were lost on each side.  What do you think that means?  Why do you think it would be so lopsided?

That should keep us busy for a bit.  Remember to bring your notes and questions to the group Thursday.

Bearing Bad News Can Be Hazardous

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting December 4 to begin the study of 2 Samuel.  We will be going over a brief book introduction, and perhaps finishing chapter 1.  This book is essentially about David's reign.  There is a brief connective break between the books of 1 and 2 Samuel, but this may have been only because the two books didn't fit on the same scroll.  Essentially they form 1 book.  The book of Samuel fits into the same narrative style or 'family' as Kings (1 and 2 Kings), which continues the account of the monarchy in Israel and Judah.

The breakdown of content is essentially as follows:

1. The transition from judges to a monarchy (1 Samuel)
2. The reign of David and the suppression of tribal distinctions (2 Samuel)
3. The reign of Solomon and the height of the Hebrew kingdom (1 Kings)
4. The fracture of Israel along tribal/geographical lines (2 Kings)

The overall story is about the eventual fall of the nation as a whole, explaining it as a result of an idolatrous life lived in rebellion against God and His law.  The beginnings leaving the confederacy of judges with God as 'King' is signaled as the first step in the wrong direction.  The total wreck of Saul's reign highlights this.  David and Solomon are seen as both the highpoint of devotion to God, but also the turning point away from God (the end of Solomon's reign).  In the end, the only hope offered is the 'release' of the last true king of Judah, but the people remain in captivity.  This leads scholars to conclude that Samuel and Kings were completed during the captivity, possibly/probably in captivity.

Read through the first chapter several times.  Then go back and read the last two or three chapters of 1 Samuel (29-31).  Read ahead in 2 Samuel to get a sense of what is being 'setup' here.  Read the first chapter again a few times.  Ask questions, make observations, prayerfully seek those things that illuminate God's character, His relationship with His human creatures, and His desires for them.

After you have read through a few times, read back through with the questions below:

• Verse 1 sets the timing.  About how many days have transpired after the death of Saul? (you will need to have read the final chapters of 1 Samuel for this one)
• What do you think it means that the man's clothes are torn and he has dust on his head?  What is this a sign of?  What do you think of his sincerity in how he looks?
• The man brings bad news about the battle.  Since David had seen the assembly of the Philistines, how surprised do you think he was?  
• Consider the way the battle is described in 1 Samuel 31.  The people who fled the battle fled from where?  All the fallen seemed to be on Mount Gilboa.  So where did this guy fit in that narrative in chapter 31?
• What do David and his men do when they hear of the battle?  What does this mean for David and his men?  Why so loyal to Saul?  Or do you think they mourn more the people than the king?
• After this initial response, David further inquires of this 'messenger'.  What's the difference between his first and second set of questions?
• Considering the recent battle David was involved in and why, why do you think the man's heritage as an Amalekite might not work in his favor with David?
• After the messenger is killed, David writes a 'dirge' for Saul and Jonathan.  Considering the meaning of 'Jashar' what do you think would make a good 'English' title for such a book?
• The repeated phrase, 'How the mighty have fallen' just sounds familiar.  Where have you heard it before this?
• The parallel nature of this poem is easy to spot throughout.  Consider the greater parallel structure, like topic started (the fallen people/Mt. Gilboa), topic in the middle (Saul and Jonathan), and topic at the end (Jonathan).  If the middle one is supposed to be the focus, what is David's focus in this poem?
• On the other hand, the phrase 'how the mighty have fallen' might form the hinge between sections (beginning, transition, ending).  In that case, there are only two sections, and the second would be the focus.  So, what do you think was David's true lament in that case?
• How else might you break the poem up into pieces?
• What do you think of David lamenting his enemy the king?  What do you think of his vengeance on behalf of his enemy the king?  Why do you think this may have been a brilliant political 'tactic' on David's part?

That should be enough to get us started on this new book.  Remember to bring your notes and questions!

One More Last Thing

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting November 13 to study the last chapter of 1 Corinthians, sixteen.  This chapter is a typical concluding chapter of Paul's letters.  It's full of lots of housekeeping and last minute challenges, greetings, soft words, and hard words.

Read through it a few times, perhaps, if you're ambitious, read through the whole letter, and then through this chapter a few times.  Try and get a sense of what Paul is trying to make sure is not lost, what he is attempting to shore up or emphasize, and perhaps a view of his heart.  Jot down notes, observations, and questions to bring Thursday.

After reading through a few times, made notes, and questions, read through again with the questions below.

• The 'collection' is a new topic for the letter, but do you think it is new to the church in Corinth?
• What is the purpose of verse 2, why do you think he's giving this instruction?  Do you think it is a slight to the church in Corinth or a general suggestion/rule?
• The collection is for believers in Jerusalem.  Why would the church in Corinth be all that interested in the church in Jerusalem?  What would be their motivation for sending money?
• Paul's travel arrangements are simply details, but do you see a pattern of his travel?  What route is he following to get to them?  (see Acts 16 and 17)
• Why do you think Paul would want to spend so much time with a group with whom he seems to have so many problems?  What does his tone sound like to you?
• Timothy may come before he gets there.  Why do you think Timothy may have cause to 'fear' from the Corinthians?
• So, do you sense Apollos does or does not want to go see them?  What do you think about Paul encouraging him to go?  What do you thing that might mean for other comments made by Paul in the beginning of the letter (see chapter 3)?
• Verse 13 begins a 'staccato' stream of commands, what do you think of these?  Why do you think they would be necessary for the believers in Corinth?
• In verse 15, is a charge to submit to leaders, and Paul names one specifically.  Considering the problems he has sited throughout may have been with 'leaders' or household 'church hosts', what do you think of his 'short list'?  Why do you think naming this one is important?
• Now the named leader is also the one who, with some others delivered help from them to him.  So, what does that tell you about 'collections' in the church?  What does that tell you about Stephanas?
• Review Aquila and Prisca (Acts 18). What do you think of these two?  How does this greeting fit their depiction in Acts 18?
• Greetings like this seem odd to us in our culture, but aside from that, what do you think of the differences between the greetings from 'Asia' and how Paul says to greet each other?  Why do you think he may have used that term?
• Why do you think it is important for Paul to write something in his own hand?  Why the additional 'love' charge?  This term for 'love' isn't the normal 'agape' love normally used, it's more a 'friendship' sort, more emotional.  Why do you think that might be important here?
• In his own hand he says that his love is with them all.  Why do you think that is important for the church in Corinth to know?

 That should keep us busy for a few minutes anyway.  Remember to bring any notes and questions you've made in your own study!

To Become Other Than We Are...

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting November 6 to study 1 Corinthians 15:35-58.  This is the part we didn't get to last week.  So, I included the questions from last weeks study page for these verses, but also added a bit to them.

Read through the whole chapter at least once, then focus your attention on the final verses of the chapter.  Read them a few times, try to imagine what this means for our bodies, what will we look like?  Jot down observations and questions.  We had a good one last week, and I wrote a blog entry on it.  These questions are really very helpful for our discussion and understanding.

After reading through the passage and doing your own search for things, read back through with the questions below:

• In verse 35 is thought to be another break, but I suspect that actually it goes with verse 33 and 34.  So, I would break at 33 not 35.  What do you think?  How would it read if we started this paragraph at 33?
• From 35 through much of the rest of the chapter, Paul argues for the reality of the resurrection in more concrete terms.  Paul draws on imagery from plants and animals, but what do you think his main is point in verses 36 through 41?
• What do you think of his contrasting argument after verse 41?  Does this clarify or obscure your understanding?
• Why do you think it is necessary that if there is a physical 'body' there must then be a spiritual 'body' as he says in verse 44?
• Look up the term 'natural' used twice in 44, and then again in 46 in a Strong's Concordance (or click the link on the word).  It's related very closely to the Greek word normally translated as 'soul', and where we get the word 'psychology' from; 'psyche'.  If we translated the word as 'soul-ish', or 'pertaining to the soul', how would that change your understanding of what the 'soul' refers to in Scripture?   
• Paul uses contrast for his description of a resurrected body in verses 42 through 49, but then in 50 and to the end, he completely changes how he presents resurrection.  It's almost worship or prayer of praise, or something.  How does Paul's description in 50 through 58 give you hope personally?
•  Verses 50 through 57 are the depiction of the contrasts in verses 42 through 49 which will happen to us when Jesus returns.  What do you feel as you read this depiction?
• Rather than discuss 'when' all this will happen in relation to things in other letters and books, consider what will happen.  What do you think this will look like?
• The implication of verse 58 is that the Corinthians have not been steadfast so far.  What do you think happened to cause them to waver?  How do you think this has or does happen to us?

This will probably take up our whole time.  There's a lot in this passage, but I would like to avoid 'end-times' discussions as far as when-what-happens-to-whom sorts of stuff.  Let's try and confine our discussion to what it will look like.  But, as I said at the beginning, if it's about Scripture, it's a valid topic to discuss, so that has to include 'end-times' topics as well.

Point, Resurrection

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting October 30 to study 1 Corinthians 15.  This is a pretty focused chapter (resurrection), but convoluted in approach.  One of the most problematic statements in Scripture is found here.  The transitions are odd, the structure of his argument a bit difficult to sense, and some elements are just down right confusing.

While some of the difficulties are due to a missing historical context or detail, some just are that way and would have been for them too.  Another issue is that this is possibly the most technically theological chapter in the entire letter.  I suspect that this chapter forms a major foundational element to how the commentator I've been reading understands the rest of the letter; that the church held a totally busted end-time view.

Some of what we'll find has to do with a mixing of pop-philosophy with the theology Paul taught them.  Sometimes, if they couldn't explain something Paul taught, they just ditched it in preference to the popular philosophical idea.  But that doesn't work in every problem we face in this chapter.

Read through the chapter a few times.  You may find it helpful to read the whole letter to see if you can find any of these concepts throughout the rest of the letter.  Jot down questions, observations, and insights you gain as you read through it.  Try and find Paul's structure to his argument.

After you've complied a good list of questions and observations, read through again with the list below:

• Why do you think, at the end, finally, he brings up the 'gospel' which he goes to great lengths to substantiate with a 'pedigree'?
• Verses 1 through 11 stand as one piece.  What do you think is the point of this first piece of Paul's argument?
• What two things does Paul specifically point to which he says are Scriptural?  Where do you think he gets that?
• In verse 12, Paul reveals that there are some who say that there is no resurrection.  Read Acts 17:22-32, where might this problem be coming from?
• Verses 12 through 19 seems to set off a second element, though not necessarily.  Here Paul stress the problems we face if there is no resurrection.  What do you think of these problems?
• Why would it be necessarily true that no resurrection means Jesus wasn't raised?  What is it about Jesus do you think Paul refers to here?
• Paul 'chains' four things together from verse 13 through 15.  What do you think of his progression here?  It makes some sense, but what about the 'false witnesses' piece, how do you think that fits in the progression, or does it?
• In verses 16 through 19 seems to start his point from 13 over again.  This progression is very different though.  Why do you think if Jesus died for our sins, but wasn't raised, we're still in our sins?  Wasn't it 'the cross' that saves us?
• In verse 18, Paul says then that those who die, really are lost, and then in 19 that we have no hope.  What do you think of his argument here?  What hope is there if there is no resurrection?
• In verse 20, Paul possibly begins a third section/point.  Here Paul begins a discussion on one of his favorite topics, Jesus over against Adam as the 'antithesis' of the fall.  How difficult is it here to see Paul's connection between Jesus and Adam?  
• In verse 23, there is now some sort of order in resurrection, and Paul describes the end times.  As you read verses 23 through 28, do you think Paul is assuming that Jesus reigns now?  That His Kingdom is current?
• The last enemy is death, which, for Paul, requires resurrection.  But when do you think this enemy will 'fall'?
• Finally, in verses 27 and 28, Paul describes a convoluted authority structure between the Father and the Son.  What do you learn of God's 'Trinitarian' nature from this description?
• Okay, so 'Baptism for the dead'; what commentary do you find on this subject?  Just bring it, because this is perhaps one of the weirdest side comments in all of Scripture.
• In verse 30, Paul goes into why he risks his life.  Why would he if there is no hope of resurrection?
• In verses 29 through 32, Paul is unpacking the lack of hope, but what turn does his argument take in verse 33?  What do you think 'bad company' might mean for this issue?
• What clue do you find in verse 34 that might indicate how this issue underlies the other pieces of the letter?
• In verse 35 is thought to be another break, but I suspect that actually it goes with verse 33 and 34.  So, I would break at 33 not 35.  What do you think?
• From 35 through much of the rest of the chapter, Paul argues for the reality of the resurrection in more concrete terms.  What do you think is his point in verses 36 through 41?
• What do you think of his contrasting argument after verse 41?  Does this clarify or obscure your understanding?
• He seems to state his contrasting elements in verses 42 through 49, but then in 50 and to the end, he 'goes off' on what it means for us.  How does Paul's description in 50 through 58 give you hope personally?
•  Do you get the feeling that at the next battle, a bunch of Christians will start looking at the skies when the signal trumpet sounds? 
• The implication of verse 58 is that the Corinthians have not been steadfast so far.  What do you think happened to cause them to waver?  How do you think this has or does happen to us?

This should keep us busy for a while, possibly a few weeks.  I look forward to studying with you!

Worship Format?

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting October 23 to study 1 Corinthians 14:26-40.  This latter half of the chapter gets at practical application of what Paul has written so far on the topic of gifts in worship.  What he describes in worship is pretty different that what we experience.  We're not in a position to change how our church worships, but we can change how we participate within our format.  Be thinking about that.

Read through these verses a few times, look for things that don't seem to fit, questions you have about how Paul phrases things, and so on.  Try and get a sense of how this application he follows 'edifies' or 'builds up' the church.  Consider how he applies 'love' described in chapter 13 to his application.

Once you've gone through a few times, go back through with the questions below (they're from the previous study sheet).

• In verses 26 through 33 Paul describes a way to all gifts to be utilized in church in an orderly manner.  What do you think such a church service would look like?  How would you feel in such a service?  Could you see such a practice in our church?  What would that look like, and how would you feel about that?
• In verse 29, what do you think it means that 'the others pass judgement' on the prophesy? What do you think that would look like in a 'worship' setting?
• You've probably heard verse 33 quoted a lot, but considering the context, does it really mean that "God always follows logical rules" or something to that effect?
• In verses 34 and 35, what is the setting?  What elements in common with the rest of the chapter do you see?
• Read back through 1 Corinthians 11:1-16; how does that make sense if this is the rule?
• How do you make sense of the tone of verses 34 and 35, with the tone of chapter 7, and 11:1-16?
•  Read verses 33 through 40 but skip 34 and 35.  Does it read consistent to you?  Now read it again with 34 and 35 back in there, does it make more or less sense?
• Trying reading the same passage (33-40) only put verse 34 and 35 after verse 40.  Does that make more or less sense to you?
• So, what makes more sense in this reading, leaving 34 and 35 where there are, putting them after 40, or leaving them out?  Verses 34 and 35 occur in every manuscript and ancient reference we have to this passage, sometimes at the end (after 40) and sometimes where we find them here.  What do you think about these verses within this argument about gifts and practice in worship?
• Paul calls on the church in Corinth to essentially 'fall in line' with the other churches.  How does that affect your consideration of such varied practice in churches today?
• Paul calls on prophets to evaluate his directive.  How does his 'call' sound to you?  Do you think he is really seeking their 'validation'?
• Consider verse 39 in light of the rest of the chapter.  What indication do you see that this particular verse is only for that historical context?  Consider the wider considerations if this verse is only for this historical context.  What else would remain there and not be for us today?
• In verse 40, what connection do you believe there is for Paul between order in worship, and 'edifying' and 'building up of' the church?

Be sure to jot down your questions and bring them.  They're important for us understanding this passage  better.  We all need various perspectives on this to get a better picture of what God is revealing to us.

Doing Gifts In Church

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting October 16 to study 1 Corinthians 14; or at least as far as we can get in this chapter.  This chapter has more problems than any other single chapter in this letter.  This caps off the discussion of the use of spiritual gifts in the church, and especially the placement of tongues among those gifts.  In some places Paul is just flat out difficult to understand.  In others, it seems completely contradictory to what he has said previously in the letter.

Read through the chapter slowly because there are some places it's easy for your mind to simply skip over rather than try and make the difficult connections.  Jot down questions, insights, and so on as you pass through the chapter.  Pay special attention to problems in wording.  Use different translations to help get through some of those, but also note how almost all translations say the same thing at some problem spots.

After you have read through the chapter a few times, read  back through using the questions below:

• Paul starts by telling the people to 'earnestly desire' spiritual things.  What do you think that means as far as who might get what gift?  Does this sound to you like we get to 'pick' or something?
• Again Paul sets tongues over against prophesy.  In his description in verse 2, what sort of 'speaking' does it seem to be to you?  Does other foreign human languages seem to be in view here?
• In verses 1 through 19 Paul goes to great lengths to demonstrate that intelligible language is preferred over unintelligible language.  What do you see as Paul's point throughout this discussion, beyond tongues versus prophesy?
• In each occurrence of some form of the verb, 'edify' (only in verse 12 does the NIV switch to 'build up'), the word truly does refer to a construction term in Greek, as in constructing a building or house.  How does that help you understand Paul's intent in all of this? Or how does it help you understand Paul's underlying concept of worship in general?
• In verse 5, Paul says that he wishes they all spoke in tongues.  In the context of the rest of the verse, and even the rest of the chapter, do you think he 'wishes' with expectation that they all will? Or is this simply a general wish without expectation?  Consider chapter 12:15-20 in your answer as well.
• In verse 6, what sorts of 'alternatives' does Paul list besides tongues?  What do you think of these alternatives?  Have you ever experienced them in worship?
• In verses 7 and 8, Paul points out some rather important considerations in the practice of tongues.  This along with verses 9 through 17, would seem to apply even to public prayer in tongues.  So, what 'exception' does Paul leave to having an interpreter when tongues are used in church?
• Verses 20-25 is probably the most difficult part of Paul's argument to figure out.  To help, read Isaiah 28, not just verses 11-12, but from the beginning through 13 (farther if you have time).  The element in Isaiah 28:9 may be to what Paul refers in verse 20, and serves to introduce 11 and only part of 12.  Why do you think Paul only used part of verse 12 in Isaiah?  
• In verse 22, Paul introduces his statement with 'so then' or 'then' meaning that he is inferring this statement from his quote.  How do you think Isaiah 28:11-12 connects to tongues being a sign to unbelievers?  Even Isaiah 28 aside, how do you see tongues as a sign to unbelievers?  A sign from who?  How do you see Isaiah 28:11-12 connecting to prophesy being a sign for believers?
• The answers to these might more easily be found in verses 23 through 25.  So, the correspondence now relies on verse 23 somehow describing how tongues are a sign to unbelievers.  So, from verse 23 perhaps combined or explained by Isaiah, how do you think tongues are a sign to unbelievers?
• From verses 24 and 25, perhaps combined with the Isaiah quote, how do you think prophesy is a sign to believers?
• In verses 26 through 33 Paul describes a way to all gifts to be utilized in church in an orderly manner.  What do you think such a church service would look like?  How would you feel in such a service?  Could you see such a practice in our church?  What would that look like, and how would you feel about that?
• In verse 29, what do you think it means that 'the others pass judgement' on the prophesy? What do you think that would look like in a 'worship' setting?
• You've probably heard verse 33 quoted a lot, but considering the context, does it really mean that "God always follows logical rules" or something to that effect?
• In verses 34 and 35, what is the setting?  What elements in common with the rest of the chapter do you see?
• Read back through 1 Corinthians 11:1-16; how does that make sense if this is the rule?
• How do you make sense of the tone of verses 34 and 35, with the tone of chapter 7, and 11:1-16?
•  Read verses 33 through 40 but skip 34 and 35.  Does it read consistent to you?  Now read it again with 34 and 35 back in there, does it make more or less sense?
• Trying reading the same passage (33-40) only put verse 34 and 35 after verse 40.  Does that make more or less sense to you?
• So, what makes more sense in this reading, leaving 34 and 35 where there are, putting them after 40, or leaving them out?  Verses 34 and 35 occur in every manuscript and ancient reference we have to this passage, sometimes at the end (after 40) and sometimes where we find them here.  What do you think about these verses within this argument about gifts and practice in worship?
• Paul calls on the church in Corinth to essentially 'fall in line' with the other churches.  How does that affect your consideration of such varied practice in churches today?

 This may be too much to cover in one evening, so we may break it up into segments, like maybe 3.  But there are only 2 more chapters after this, so maybe we can finish up this month...maybe not.

The Only Eternal 'Gift of the Spirit'

This is now, the Study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting October 9 to study 1 Corinthians 13.  Since no one showed October 2, we'll try this again on the 9th.  This chapter is probably made more difficult by its familiarity more than anything.  There are few real problems with translation but we will spend most of our time in word study through verses 4 through 7.

Read this chapter through slowly.  Then go back and read chapters 12, 13, and 14 together.  Then read through thirteen again slowly.  Jot down observations.  What are your thoughts about the overall tone, and unpack some of the implications of how Paul describes love.  What would this sort of love look like on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays at home, work, school, traveling, and shopping?  Be sure to use several translations, especially on the middle four verses, but really everywhere you will see some diversity in translations.  I suspect this is more an attempt to shake up the familiarity so we think more, than it is about some difficulty in understanding the words.

After reading through the chapter a few times, read back through with the questions below:

• What do you think the 'context' of verse 1 means for the 'clanging' and 'noisy' instruments?  In other words, where does the 'speaking in tongues of men and of angels' happen that they would correlate to such horrible 'music'?
• If, in verse 2, Paul says the result of not having love is nothing, and then in verse 3, gain nothing, what do you thing the 'nothing' is in verse 1?  Is it 'sound like nothing'? or what?
• The first 'gift' referred to in verse 1 is tongues; then prophecy, knowledge, and faith in verse 2; then giving, and martyrdom.  What do you think about these as 'gifts of the Spirit'?  The list differs somewhat from chapter 12, so do you think these are all truly spiritual gifts?
• Look at Galatians 5:22, 23.  How many of these qualities of love in this chapter match those in the list of 'Fruit of the Spirit'?
• As you read these qualities in verses 4 through 7, what are your fears?  What concerns you about this list or living this way every day?
• There are 'is' and 'is not' qualities listed.  How many of each kind do you find? (I found 7 'is' and 8 'is not', but I only looked in verses 4 through 7)
• With the list containing 'is not' qualities, Paul contrasts love with other, possibly more common, behavior.  What do you think the people of Corinth thought of this list?  What do you suspect may have been their qualities?  Now, what about you?  How do your qualities match up?  Is your 'is' and 'is not' list somewhat inverted from this one? (Mine is)
• In the last verses of this chapter, Paul moves to another set of contrasts that demonstrate the priority of love.  Why will prophecy, tongues, and knowledge all 'pass away'?  When do you think that will happen?  Why do you think that will happen?
• What do you think Paul means by his illustration of being a 'child' versus a 'man'?  When does that happen in this discussion?
• When will we see face-to-face and know fully?  So, Paul is pointing to a future when none of these 'gifts' will be necessary, yet love will remain.  What does that mean for 'gifts' today?
• Look at Hebrews 11:1.  Since faith substantiates hope, what do you think 'substantiates' faith?  Or do you think Love is also substantiated by faith, or hope?  How do these relate in such a way that love is 'greatest'?  Do you think James 2:14-26 sheds light on this relationship?  If so, how?

That should keep us busy for an hour.  Hopefully, at the end of this we will really have a better understanding, not of love itself, but how we are to love every day.  How's that for a challenge?

The Unifying Function of the One Spirit

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting September 25 to study 1 Corinthians 12.  We've finally reached that portion of 1 Corinthians that inspired our choice of this letter.  We're now exploring the gifts given by the Holy Spirit.  This chapter introduces this topic, but it's clear from Paul's position, this is really just leading into something else, supporting arguments he's going to use later.  We already know what's in chapter 13 (but we'll still spend some time there), and I believe we wrap up this discussion in chapter 14.  So, perhaps the more distilled discussion will be in chapter 14.

In any case, this chapter provides the ground work for any discussion of spiritual gifts, or as Paul puts it in verse 1, 'spiritual stuff'.  Read through 12, 13, and 14 together, then go back and focus on 12.  Read through it a few times jotting down questions and observations.  Try and use different translations, noting any differences you find.  There shouldn't be many differences between translations, but there are some.

After having gone through a few times, go back through using the questions below:

• What do you think it means that Paul doesn't want the Corinthians to be 'unaware' of spiritual gifts?
• Why do you think Paul would bring up, at the outset, that they had been 'pagans'?
• In verse 3 Paul makes a statement about confessing Jesus as Lord or cursing him.  Why do you think this distinction is at the very beginning?  What 'problem' or 'view' do you think it addresses?
• Why do you think would Paul point to both 'gifts' and 'ministries'?  What's the difference in his statements?
• Verse 6 is one of the places where versions differ in wording.  Look up 'effects'/'working'/'activities'/'operations' here.  The verb used for God's action is related.  Look it up here. It's the Greek word from which we get 'energy'.  It's a common Greek word for any sort of 'activity' in which someone might be engaged.  While some of its derivatives are divine references, this one is not exclusively 'divine'.  What do you think that means for Paul's discussion here?  Why do you think He chose this wording?
• Verses 4 through 11 really form one point.  What do you think is Paul's point? 
• It would be a good idea to look up each gift/ministry listed in 8 through 10, but not necessary.  I think it's more interesting to note the 'pairs'; why Paul one with the other.  Some are obviously related, but what do you think about pairing 'faith' and 'healing' or the 'triplet' 'miracles', 'prophecy', and 'distinguishing spirits'?  Why put these together?
• In verses 12 through 26 is Paul's famous metaphor of the body for describing the church as the body of Christ.  His argument is actually supposed to be funny.  Instead of 'members' as most translations read, try 'part' (like the NIV) or even 'limb'.  Read through substituting 'part' or 'limb' in each place where it might say 'member'.  What difference does that make in your understanding or view of Paul's statements?
• Obviously Paul is referring to the church as made up of different parts or 'limbs' distinguished by ministry and gifts.  But what application do you think would be appropriate for his discussion of those body parts we consider 'weaker' or 'less presentable' in verses 23 through 25?  How does this apply to our church?
• Do you think that verse 28 'prioritizes' gifts or lists them 'chronologically' or what?
• Paul applies his previous arguments in verses 29 and 30, and it's not surprising, but what do you think about the first statement in verse 31?  Was that surprising?  How do you think we 'desire' the 'greater' gifts?  And what do you think that means for my question about verse 28?

The last statement in this chapter really belongs to chapter 13, and we'll include it in that discussion, hopefully next week.  This should be plenty to keep us busy this week.

Examining Self-Examination Within A Group of Other-Examiners

This is the study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study meeting September 18 to study the rest of 1 Corinthians 11.  It's taken about 2 weeks to finally get to this passage, but I believe we can finally get some of this covered.  It's important stuff.

Read through the whole chapter again at least once.  Then focus on verses 17 through the end.  This is specifically about the Lord's Supper/Communion and the problems with their practice.  The exact details are sketchy, so read carefully.  Try and get a sense of what was happening when they practiced the Supper.  Pay specific attention to differences from the way we practice today.

After you've read through the passage several times, jotting down your own observations and questions to bring to the group, read through again with the questions below:

• Switching gears, he says, 'But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you...'  What instruction, the one he concluded, or the one coming up?  And if the one concluded, why would he start it with a statement that seems to imply he does praise them?  If the one coming up, then what do you make of the 'praise' in verse 2?
• Read 1 Corinthians 1:10 and 11.  Why do you think Paul would put 'in part' about his belief of 'divisions' when he's already covered some of them?  What might that mean for this particular issue?
• After criticizing their 'divisions' at the beginning of the letter, he now claims they are necessary?  What do you think he means by that?
• In their practice of the Lord's Supper, Paul says it has stopped being the Lord's Supper.  Why do you think that would be the case?
• Paul describes what they are doing in verses 21 and 22.  How would you describe what they are doing?  For instance, where do you think this happens?  Try, as best as you can, to remove your own 21st Century practice out of the mix, and imagine what is happening.
• Paul repeats for them what he had delivered to them when he was there.  Where does he say he got it?  What do you think he means by 'I received from the Lord...' since he wasn't a disciple of Jesus?
• Paul uses a word 'remembrance' in his quotes of Jesus in verses 24 and 25. Look it up here.  What do you think could be another or even better English word choice?
• What do you think about Paul's point of the Lord's Supper in verse 26?  Is that what it's all about to you?
• What is Paul's claim that to eat the Lord's Supper in an 'unworthy manner' is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord tied back to?  Why does that make you guilty of the body and blood of the Lord?
• Look up the word, 'examine' here.  What other English words would work well here?
• What do you think you should be looking for in this examination?
• What are the consequences for not examining yourself as you take the Lord's Supper?
• Considering the consequences, what do you make of verse 32?  Do you think Paul is saying it's for our own good when we die because we take the Lord's Supper unworthily?
• Paul applies this to the specific practice in Corinth in verses 33 and 34.  How do you think we should apply it in our worship?

That should/may keep us occupied for an hour.  After this it's on to expression of 'gifts'.  Hopefully this will enlighten us about our own practice since this is a very common practice among modern churches, where gifts are more controversial than common.

Worship Problems, From Head Gear to Meal Ettiquette

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting September 4 to study 1 Corinthians 11.  This is a somewhat weird chapter, at least it begins weird.  The first verse actually goes with chapter 10, the first issue is very confusing after 2,000 years of cultural change, and the second issue seems to refer to a practice of the Lord's Supper we no longer use, and no one seems to remember.

So, part of our problems will be how to apply these peculiarities to our life today.  If it's so difficult to see what Paul's talking about then, it will be extremely hard to come up with what we need to carry forward 2,000 years to our church life today.  I'm confident we'll find something, but it will be very interesting to discover what.

Read through the chapter in as many translations as you have.  I know this takes time, but there isn't a better practice that will bring linguistic issues to the forefront.  Even as I translate, I still have about 6 versions right there to look at while I'm doing it; it helps to spot inconsistencies or consistencies in translation.  Differences are good places to ask questions or make some further investigation, like with a Strong's.

After reading through several times, jotting down notes and questions, read through again with the questions below:

• Do you think Paul is being 'truthful' in verse 2?  Do they really 'remember him'?  Do they really hold firmly to traditions?  Has he given any examples of that either in previous chapters or in this one?
• Do you think there is a 'progression' in verse 3?  Does it go 'Christ, man, woman'? What about God?
• The word 'head' is used twice in verse 4, do you think Paul is referring to the man's literal head both times?  Why or why not? (you may need to think about this verse in light of verse 3 to answer)
• Not only is 'head' used twice in verse 5, but clearly a literal head is in view because of 'shaved', and 'shorn' in verse 6.  But do you think her literal head is 'disgraced'?  Why or why not? (again, consider verse 3 and then verse 7)
• Read Genesis 1:27.  What do you think of Paul's allusion to this verse in verse 7?  Do you think his argument makes sense as he applies Gen 1:27 to this issue of head-coverings?
• Verses 8 and 9 originate out of the Genesis 2 creation story (Gen 2:20-24).  What do you think of Paul's use of those verses here?
• From verses 7 through 9, Paul clearly refers to the creation account in Genesis.  Why do you think he would go there for this issue?
• You really need to look at verse 10 in at least a King James or New King James translation.  Then look at a New International or New American Standard version.  If you have it, look at the whole passage in the New Revised Standard.  All these translations work over verse 10 differently.  Note especially the 'italics' where a word is added that does not appear in the Greek text.  Read the verse through without the italicized words.  What do you think might be an alternative meaning after reading it that way?
• Do you think verses 11 and 12 soften Paul's stance on women in church, or do they simply reveal his true belief which lies behind what he writes here?  Why do you think any such distinction is important, both to us and to the church in Corinth?
• In verses 13 through 15, does Paul truly support his view of head covering with his point about hair?  Have you ever seen a picture of Jesus with short hair?  Any of the apostles?  Ever?  What do you think he's referring to here? 
• Since Roman customs seemed to include men with what we would consider 'short hair', it might be easy to say this is local for Corinth, a Roman colony.  But do you think we can really do that considering verse 16?
• Switching gears, he says, 'But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you...'  What instruction, the one he concluded, or the one coming up?  And if the one concluded, why would he start it with a statement that seems to imply he does praise them?  If the one coming up, then what do you make of the 'praise' in verse 2?
• Read 1 Corinthians 1:10 and 11.  Why do you think Paul would put 'in part' about his belief of 'divisions' when he's already covered some of them?  What might that mean for this particular issue?
• After criticizing their 'divisions' at the beginning of the letter, he now claims they are necessary?  What do you think he means by that?
• In their practice of the Lord's Supper, Paul says it has stopped being the Lord's Supper.  Why do you think that would be the case?
• Paul describes what they are doing in verses 21 and 22.  How would you describe what they are doing?  For instance, where do you think this happens?  Try, as best as you can, to remove your own 21st Century practice out of the mix, and imagine what is happening.
• Paul repeats for them what he had delivered to them when he was there.  Where does he say he got it?  What do you think he means by 'I received from the Lord...' since he wasn't a disciple of Jesus?
• Paul uses a word 'remembrance' in his quotes of Jesus in verses 24 and 25. Look it up here.  What do you think could be another or even better English word choice?
• What do you think about Paul's point of the Lord's Supper in verse 26?  Is that what it's all about to you?
• What is Paul's claim that to eat the Lord's Supper in an 'unworthy manner' is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord tied back to?  Why does that make you guilty of the body and blood of the Lord?
• Look up the word, 'examine' here.  What other English words would work well here?
• What do you think you should be looking for in this examination?
• What are the consequences for not examining yourself as you take the Lord's Supper?
• Considering the consequences, what do you make of verse 32?  Do you think Paul is saying it's for our own good when we die because we take the Lord's Supper unworthily?
• Paul applies this to the specific practice in Corinth in verses 33 and 34.  How do you think we should apply it in our worship?

That should keep us plenty busy Thursday.  I hope you can make good use of the extra day to study.  This is a perplexing chapter, so let's puzzle over it together!

Life Lessons from Israel and Communion

This is the study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting August 28 to study 1 Corinthians 10.  This chapter possibly wraps up the topic of 'eating food sacrificed to idols'.  It has lots of interesting pieces to it including an assessment/application of Israel's history to current church life.  It contains several familiar verses, but I'll bet this is the first time most of us have really dug through the context of them.

Read through the chapter several times, jotting down observations and questions.  Look through several translations, and note areas of disagreement.  Also, bring different translations to the group - like the different one we had last week.  That helps us all get different perspectives. 

After reading through and making your own notes/questions, read through again using the questions below:

• Paul points out the 'unity' of experience of the people of Israel in the desert (vs. 1-4), but notes that God was not pleased with them.  What counter-argument do you think he is trying to undermine with that statement (it's all one sentence in Greek)?  What do you think the believers in Corinth were saying that needed this to correct?
• Paul begins to site their faults as 'examples'.  Keeping in mind the passages so far in this letter, why do you think Paul chose these items as examples?
• Which of those that Paul chose do you think still apply to church today?
• Paul thinks he lives at the end of the age (v. 11).  In what ways might he have been right?
• After the illustrations from Israel's history, then he puts in the verse about temptation (v. 13), but not before his challenge to those who think they stand.  Why do you think he's 'building' his argument right here this way?  What do you think he's arguing against in the church in Corinth?
• We have been told that we are to flee immorality as a sin, but here we are told to also feel idolatry.  Why do you think we hear so much about the one, but not the other in our churches today?
• Paul now applies these things to the Lord's Supper.  This is why we call it "Communion", we all partake together from the same thing.  Paul acknowledges that this unifies the church, but what do you think he sees as the 'additional lesson' they should have taken from it?
• In verse 22, what lesson from Israel do you think Paul might be referring back to?
• What do you think Paul means in verse 23?  Are all things truly 'permissible' or 'lawful'?
• Now Paul lays down some specific direction.  Who do you think this direction is for? Who do you think this direction is supposed to affect?  Why do you think Paul may have switched his 'victim' here at the end?  Or do you think he did?
• How do you think all this changes or modifies your understanding of verse 31?  Or has it?
• What are some ways we can apply the ending principle of verses 32-33 in our lives/church?

That should keep us busy for at least an hour.  Remember to bring your own notes to share.  

Free To Be Free, But Disciplined

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting August 21 to study 1 Corinthians 9.  This chapter seems to be an opportunity for Paul to vent; like he's tired of people taking advantage of him.  Or perhaps you might see him attempting to reassert some credibility among churches.  But I think, when you look closer, those things have little to do with this chapter.

Read through this chapter several times, use as many translations as you have handy.  Look for places where translations seem to disagree.  Those are good places to check the footnotes to see why.  Make notes, jot down questions, and highlight stuff where the Spirit seems to be highlighting stuff for you.  Then, step back from the chapter, and read it aloud straight through.  If you don't see a unifying theme different from the elements, then try it again, only include the last verse from 8.  If that doesn't work, read 8, 9, and 10 together.

After you've read through, made notes, asked questions, read through again using the questions below:

• There is some debate about what 'Apostle' means in the New Testament, and who is referred to when the term is used.  What do you think Paul means by the term in verse 1 and 2, and what do you think his criteria is for using the term on himself?
• This chapter takes on a defensive tone because of verse 3.  Why do you think he's defending himself, and against whom do you think he's defending himself?
• Corinth was visited in the second missionary journey, without Barnabas.  So why do you think Paul brings him up and not Timothy and Silas?
• Do you think Paul is complaining in verses 4 through 14?  He pulls from culture, Scripture, common religious practice, and then his own rights.  Why do you think he's working so hard at supporting his stance here?
• In verse 15, Paul's argument takes a dramatic turn.  In a sense, he up-ends the whole thing on the reader/listener, and then shoves it down around their ears.  What do you think he's up to by doing that?
• When Paul says he'd rather die than to receive 'wages' for preaching, do you think he's being a 'drama king' or do you think something else is driving him?  If you think it's something else, what do you think that might be?
• In verses 16 through 18, Paul drives home his point of view, within his ministry, but how do you think he intends the believers in Corinth to apply it?
• In verse 19, Paul makes a statement, then supports it in verses 20 through 22.  Again though, how do you think he intends the believers in Corinth to apply this?  How do you think a 'craftsman' or 'laborer' or 'slave' can 'become all things to all men to win some'?
• In Corinth, they had the Isthmian Games, second only to the Olympics in the Mediterranean.  So, the people are very well acquainted with Paul's imagery in verses 24 through 27.  But what do you think Paul refers to as the 'crown', and what does it seem to require to get it?  What do you see possibly wrong with this view, or how do you think it can be distorted?

That should keep us busy for the evening.  I look forward to seeing you Thursday.

Choosing Your 'Restaraunt' Carefully

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting August 14 to study 1 Corinthians 8.  This is a short chapter, but the discussion could carry us for an hour.  This begins what is possibly the second longest discussion within 1 Corinthians.  I think the discussion on spiritual gifting is longer, but this one easily rivals that one.

The discussion on food sacrificed to idols is very culturally contextualized.  Applying what Paul teaches here is truly more about the principles he uses rather than the practice.  But there are ample places to apply the principles.  As you study this chapter, see what contemporary cultural practice you can come up with that will form a decent parallel to the application of these principles.  It may not be easy, and we will all need to make some concessions as to points of similarity and difference.  I'm not convinced there is a modern practice that will fit as nicely into this discussion as sacrificial food did then.  But there may be.  See what you can find.

Read through this very short chapter a few times.  In this chapter, since it's so short, you may more easily see the argument structure Paul uses to start.  As you read through, look for argument structures, but also different words in different translations, changes in sentence structure, and anything you find surprising or noteworthy.  After going through a few times, read back through with these questions:

• Why do you think Paul makes reference to 'knowledge' right at the beginning?
• How do you think it's possible that if you think you know, you're actually stupid?
• Why do you think being known by God is a 'counter point' to knowing something?
• What do you think Paul meant by 'many gods and many lords'?
• Look at verse 6 in several translations, as many as you can find.  Do any of them structure it as a 'poem'?  What do you think that might mean if it was a poem?
• In verse 7 Paul gets at other side of the problem with food sacrificed to idols.  Essentially, this 'knowledge' that there is only One God isn't 'universal' within the church.  What possible modern situation can you think of that parallels this problem?
• Paul concedes that eating does not commend or convict us before God.  Considering Paul's Jewish roots, what do changes in thinking you think Paul had to make to come to that conclusion? 
• In verse 9, Paul lays out the principle he uses to begin this argument.  What can you think of today where we can apply this principle?
• In verse 10, the effect is that one without the underlying knowledge eats (and sins in his mind/heart).  Why do you think the solution is not 'education'?  Why do you think abstinence is the only option Paul will recommend?
• For the one without knowledge to eat means that he is 'ruined', the brother for whom Christ died.  So what is it that constitutes sin, the action or the heart and belief?  Do you think that's always true?
• To cause another to 'stumble' in their walk with Jesus is to sin against Jesus.  Do you think this is also about the heart and belief as opposed to action?
• Do you think Paul is advocating a 'vegan' lifestyle?

That should help us have plenty to discuss.  On into this discussion in the following chapters, you may want to revisit some of your conclusions here; on the other hand, you may not.  This part of the argument isn't the conclusion, it's the opening, first point of his argument.  It only gets more fun from here.

End-Times Marriage...Or Not

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting August 7 to study 1 Corinthians 7.  There's a ton in this chapter, so we'll get to what we can.  The immanent return of Jesus seems to form the overall background of all that Paul recommends and commands in this chapter.  So this will bring up some interesting questions, I hope.

Read through the chapter several times, in as many translations as you can find.  Look for strange wording or where different versions have truly worded it very differently.  In such places pay careful attention to footnotes.  Jot down observations and questions that come to your mind as you read.  Be sure to bring these to the group.

After reading through several times with your own observations and questions, read through again with those below:

• What sort of 'religious' problems do you think Paul might be using in his reference to 'touch'?  Look at Exodus 19:12,13; Leviticus 11:8, 12:4; Deuteronomy 14:8 for help here.  Can you think of others?
• Why do you think Paul balances references to men and women so evenly here?  What do you think that says about the status of women in their congregation? (consider again, 1 Co 1:11)
• Verse 1 and verse 6 seem to 'bracket' this first section.  So Paul gives this command, but doesn't seem happy about it.  What do you think is Paul's overall view of marriage?
• Paul reveals something of his own 'condition' in verse 7, but points out it has to do with 'gifting'.  On the other hand, he doesn't refer to 'gifting' in verse 9.  Why do you think that is?
• In verse 10, Paul shifts from his own views to those of Jesus.  Where is he now getting these instructions?
• In almost every translation it seems what the wife might do in verse 10 is referred to differently than what the husband does in verse 11.  Why do you think Paul switches terms here?  He's still balanced, but perhaps this gives more detail to the circumstances of women?  (look forward to verse 13)
• Why do you think Paul would speak of reconciliation of the wife, but not the husband?  Which is more restrictive here?
• In verse 12, we have a switch away from commands from Jesus and toward Paul's directives.  Why do you think he would switch up here, and how does that help you gain insight to how we can use Scripture?
• Verse 14 is interesting because it is not really clear how this is true and what it means for the unbelieving spouse and children.  References in Ezra 9:2 and Malachi 2:15 are not especially helpful here since they address a different problem.
• In verse 15 do you think Paul is describing 'divorce' and then those rules apply or simply separation? What then happens to the believing spouse?
• Do you think Paul is switching topics entirely in verse 16 or do you see it somehow related to the previous discussion on marriage and divorce?
• In verse 19, Paul says circumcision is nothing, but yet says keeping the commands of God.  Isn't circumcision a command of God?
• Paul has a special section just for circumcision and slavery.  Why do you think these would be two important issues within the church?
• Paul repeats, 'remain in the condition in which you were called.'  Why do you think this might need repeating in this congregation?
• In verse 25, the same grammatical structure used in verse 1, signalling a change in topic is used.  What do you think that means for my question about verse 16?
• In verses 25 through 28, what is Paul's assumption that forms his opinion here?  How do you think this influences his other references previously in this chapter?
• In verses 29 through 31, how would this look for us?  Do you think this still applies today? If so, how?  What do you think it would look like?
• Paul says his motivation is 'unrestricted devotion to God' (verse 35), what is his view of those who marry?  Do you think this is still true today?
• These references to 'virgin' may actually have to do with giving a daughter in marriage.  What do you think it would mean in that culture to not give the daughter in marriage? (we'd all be guessing here)
• Verses 39 and 40 refer to widows.  Here again Paul thinks 'single is better'.  Why do you think he would 'support' his view by claiming that he too has the Spirit of God?

That should do for now.  We may be able to wade through all this in an hour or so.  But we may not either.  We'll take it as we go.

Of Torts and Tarts

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Group meeting July 31 to study 1 Corinthians 6.  This chapter continues, in a sense, the discussion from chapter 5.  While there a specific sin was being addressed, the concept of judging sin within the church also forms the challenge to judge between disputes as well.  There are some challenging elements to this chapter, but the language is fairly straight forward.  It really means what it says, and there isn't a lot of deviation between translations.

Read through the chapter several times, noting thematic elements, transitions, questions, and observations you make along the way.  Paul has some peculiar perspectives, and he commands some peculiar things of the church.  Reviewing chapter 5 and looking ahead at chapter 7 may be helpful in understanding this chapter.

After reading through and making notes, read through again with the questions below:

• The sort of legal process described in verse 1 was one that Moses handled in the desert (Exodus18:13-27).  In other places in Scripture these were handled were in the city gates.  Why do you think Paul wants to keep them in the church?
• Paul uses some interesting reasoning to support his command to keep civil cases in the church.  In verse two he says 'saints will judge the world.' Where do you think he comes up with this?
• Paul then says believers will judge angels in verse 3.  Why do you think he is so adamant about bringing these sorts of legal things in the church?
• Does verse 4 sound to you like the church in Corinth already has 'judges' but these people aren't using them?  If so, why do you think they wouldn't be using such a thing?
• By bringing these civil matters into the public courts, Paul says they should be ashamed.  Why do you think that would be a source of shame?  Why should they instead simply suffer the supposed wrong?
• In verse 8 Paul may supply the reason he thinks they take these issues into the civil courts.  What do you think he means by this charge?
• How do you think we could do something like this in our church?  Maybe some sort of program like the NADR program might work?  Why do you think this might be a good idea?  Why might it not work in our society?
• In verse 9 Paul lists some types of people who will not inherit the Kingdom of God.  Do you think some of the Corinthians still practiced such things?  Do you think we have some who do in our church?
• What do you think is Paul's point in verse 11?  How does this contrast answer what he sees as the foundational problem in verses 1 through 10?
• Do you think Paul completely switches topic in verse 12?
• If all things are 'lawful' how do the 'judges' referred to above 'judge'?  What do you think he means here?
• How do you think is Jesus 'for your body' in verse 13?  In what way is this true?
• Paul also supports his point by pointing to our eventual resurrection.  Why do you think this supports his command to avoid sexual sins?
• In verse 15, what are 'members'?  What is another word for this?  If you use another word for this, how does it changes the meaning for you?
• In verse 16, Paul uses a reference we normally use for marriage.  They did too.  What does that mean to you that he would use it here? 
• Consider verse 17.  Think about that a bit.  What does this statement mean to you?  What other areas in your life does this affect, and how?
• In verse 19, Paul says that their individual bodies are 'temples of the Holy Spirit'.  Refer back to 1 Corinthians 3:16 where it was the 'church'.  How can they both be true?
• What do you think could possibly be the connection between the first 11 verses and 12-20? 

That should keep us busy for at least an hour.  We may not finish, but it may be quick; I never can tell.  Remember to bring your questions and observations to the group.

Judgement Inside Not Outside

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting July 17 to study 1 Corinthians 5.  This is a very interesting chapter.  Along with the following one (they are somewhat related) Paul's call to not judge seems to reverse itself.  The specific instance is also interesting; not so much the sin as the response of the church.

Read through the chapter several times (it's really short).  Look for peculiar statements, questions, and perspectives.  Ask questions of the text like why, what did that really mean, and what did the people of Corinth think that meant?  Things like that will get you thinking about the text.  You/we may not find answers to those questions, but they get us more engaged with what our Master has inspired.  Jot down your questions and observations and bring them to the meeting.

After compiling your own set of questions and observations, go back through the chapter again with the questions below:

• Look up the word used in verse 1 for the sin committed here.  Listen to the pronunciation.  What English word does this Greek word sound like?  Look up the word, 'pornography' (there isn't any on this site).  What is the origin of this English word?  So what does this 'sin' include?  What sort of sexual behavior would it not include?
• Why do you think this particular sin (in this case in Corinth) is considered bad, even among Gentiles?
•  Read Leviticus 18.  This is a long list, but consider that even relations between parents remarried are included.  Also consider the reason given for such a list.  Why do you think God was both thorough and repeatedly supporting His reason citing the people of both Egypt and Canaan?
• Why do you think the church should have mourned over this sin rather than been proud? 
• Paul has already judged this man as spiritually part of the assembly in Corinth.  Why can he do this when he doesn't even 'judge' himself (see 4:3)?  Why leave judgement for the coming of Jesus in chapter 4, but exercise it here in chapter 5? (read ahead to chapter 6 for even more questions)
• Look at 1 Timothy 1:21-20.  What do you think Paul means there and here when he says 'deliver such a one over to Satan'?  How do you think that happens?
• What do you think it means 'destruction of his flesh so that his spirit may be saved'? (good place to use a 'study Bible' or commentary)
• According to verses 6 through 8, what is the effect of this sin on the church in Corinth?  I think it's clear from this passage the church celebrates the Passover.  What do you think is the significance here to Paul's reference to Jesus as our Passover having been sacrificed?  What do you think that means to them?
• The word, 'associate with' or 'company with' is made up of three words, 'together', 'again', and 'mix', in that order (see the 'Root Word' in the entry).  It's not an uncommon Greek word, but it's not used much in Scripture (3 times, twice in this chapter).  What sort of image does this bring to your mind?
• Why do you think Paul would not prohibit the people from associating with immoral people in the world?  Why be so harsh with the same people in the church?  How do you think church today approaches this problem?
• Look at the list of sins in verses 10 and 11.  Did you notice the list for those in the church is longer?  How do you see all these sins listed?  Do you see them as the same, requiring the same response?
• Consider verse 12 along with 4:5.  Paul clearly has two different things in mind here since he assumes they judge those within the church.  What do you think is the difference?
• If those outside the church are judged by God, do you think this relates to Paul's statements about judging in chapter 4?
• Paul quotes a phrase used in Deuteronomy over and over, almost thematically.  Look at Deuteronomy 13:5, 17:7,12, 21:21, and 22:21.  In each instance in Deuteronomy, how is the evil removed?  Considering verse 5, how closely do you think these concepts are related? 

I know this chapter is only 13 verses, but I think we have plenty of topic to discuss with it.  If these questions bring up more for you, then be sure to bring those to share as well.

Sarcastic Servants of The King?

This is the study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting June 26 to study 1 Corinthians 4 (actually 3 and 4).  In this chapter, Paul wraps up his initial argument with the Corinthian church about their treatment of each other and how they regard him.  These first four chapters set up a context in which we can better understand the rest of the issues Paul addresses.  Everything else with which they struggle comes out of this initial discussion.

Read through this chapter several times.  It may be very helpful to start with chapter 1 again, and read through these four chapters together.  The repetition of themes, illustrations, and problems is best seen by reading all four together.  As we launch into the more familiar issues Paul covers you will see direct and indirect ties back to these issues.

As you read through this and the preceding chapters, what doesn't make sense to you?  Where are the things that Paul leaves unexplained or assumed?  Jot down questions and observations you have as you read through.  Be sure to bring those observations and questions to the group.

After you've read through several times, found some questions and observations, read through again with the questions below:

• From verse 1, look up the word Paul uses we translate as 'ministers' at this link.  Look through the various places listed at the bottom where this word is used in the New Testament.  How is this different from 'slave' or 'bond servant', words common with Paul?  There are some 'synonyms' listed in Greek, like doulos (slave) and diakonos (deacon/minister).  Paul wants the church to consider him with this word rather than as a slave or 'deacon'.  Why do you think that might be?
• In verse 1, the other word for how the church should consider Paul is as a 'steward' or 'head butler' of a house.  What sort of image does this bring to mind as you consider church leaders?
• In verse 2 Paul says that 'stewards' are supposed to be 'trustworthy' as if that were the primary quality sought in such people.  What does that mean for Paul?  What do you think that would look like?  Trustworthy to whom?
• Verse 3 is a common verse used to prevent 'judgmental' attitudes in church.  To what do you think Paul is referring here?  It may be helpful to review verse 5:3 before you come to some sort of conclusion.
•  Why do you think Paul wouldn't 'examine' himself?  Read ahead in 11:28.  Obviously Paul has something different in mind here than there.  Look up the word for 'examine' from 1 Corinthians 4:3, and the word, 'examine' from 11:28.  When you compare them, what do you think is the essential difference?
• The root of the word used in verse 4 turns up in verse 5 ('krino'), but also 5:3.  What do you think the difference is between 'judging' here (don't do it, but wait for God), and verse 5:3 (where Paul does it without even being there)?
• If Paul is referring to 'Scripture' when he refers to 'what has been written', then what Scripture are they not to exceed?
• Considering verses 6 and 7, what is the obvious problem the Corinthians have, and how do you think this relates to the previous statements about 'judging'?
• Take your best guess, do you think Paul is serious in his assessment of the believers in verse 8?  If not why is he writing this way?  If so, what does he end the verse that way?
• Can you sense the continuation of the tone from verse 8 throughout 9 through 13?  What do you think Paul is doing here in this part of his argument?  Consider, how do you think Paul feels as he writes this? What emotion do you sense in these words?
• In verse 14, Paul states his purpose in writing as he has, what do you think of as the difference between 'shame' and 'warn' or 'admonish' (the English words)?
• Look up the two words, 'shame' and 'admonish'.  What difference do you see between these?  Is it the same as the English words used?
• Paul connects himself to them as 'father' to them as 'children'.  Having made that claim, what is his challenge to them?  Do you think that's proper or right?
• In that light (fathers and sons), he sends Timothy.  What sort of reception do you imagine Timothy receiving when he arrives?
• Paul wraps up this chapter (part of the letter) stating that he intends to come.  What do you see as the criteria he will use in comparing the 'arrogant' people there in Corinth and himself?  What do you think verse 20 means, in practical terms?  What does that look like?

That should carry us through an hour (or more).  As I said, there are great things in this chapter.  Bring your own questions and observations to the group.

What Is The Church? What Are Her Leaders?

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Study Group meeting June 5 to study 1 Corinthians 3.  This chapter continues the discussion Paul has been having with the church in Corinth about their behavior.  In some ways, this concludes the discussion for Paul (or his side), but not entirely.  He returns to themes he started in chapter 1, refers to elements he brought up in chapter 2, and wraps them up under his essential problem with what he hears about the Corinthian believers.

Read through the chapter several times.  It may be helpful in this case to also re-read from chapter 1 through 3 to get sense of how this particular piece holds together (which it does nicely).  That way you can better see what elements he revisits here, and how he uses prior comments and positions.  In this chapter, focus on the 'imagery' Paul uses.  Look for what he considers to be of utmost importance the problems among the Corinthian believers. Jot down questions and observations as you go through the chapter several times.

After going through the chapter a few times making notes and questions, go back through using the questions below:

• If Paul's accusation against the Corinthian believers is that they are 'infants' and 'fleshly', then what problem do you think he's trying to correct?
• What 'clues' does Paul point to with the Corinthians to substantiate his assessment of them?
• Verse 4 pulls back the argument elements from Chapter 1.  So, what do you think that means for our understanding of this and previous chapters?
• Read Mark 4:26-29.  Now read verses 5 through 7 in 1 Corinthians 3.  What do you think might be similarities here?  What might be some differences?
• In Paul's use of the field and workers as imagery how much do you think he 'borrowed' from words of Jesus?  Where would he have 'heard' these words?
• What do you think Paul means by 'reward' in verse 8?  And who gets whatever the reward might be?
• Who is the 'field' and 'building? And who do they belong to?
• Why do you think Paul means by 'foundation'? How is Jesus the 'foundation' of the Corinthian church?
• So, what do you think it means to 'build' on Jesus Christ?  And what do you think it means to build with various materials?
• How will fire 'test' the quality, and what do you think Paul means by 'fire'?  What fire will test the quality?
• Paul again returns to 'reward' in verse 14.  How do you think this is or isn't similar to 'reward' in verse 8?
• In verse 15, 'loss' and 'saved' are both used, but what do you think they are referring to?
• In verses 10 through 15, who is being addressed?  Who is this for?
• Paul again returns to 'wisdom' and 'foolishness' to wrap up his argument.  How do you think he is tying 'wisdom versus foolishness' to 'building'/'planting' and various factions?  What's his point?
• How do you think 'all things' belong to the Corinthian church?  What does that mean for us?

That should keep us busy for a while.  I'm not sure we will be able to answer all these questions, some really may not be answerable.  Be sure to bring your own questions as well.

Wisdom Versus Foolishness, Spiritual Versus Natural: Building New Paradigms

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting May 29 to study 1 Corinthians 2.  This is a short chapter, and much like a continuation of the previous one.  There are lots of elements chapters 1 and 2 have in common, like where Paul 'leaves off' in chapter 1 is continued in chapter 2, and what ends chapter 2 continues into chapter 3, and so on.  In fact, through 4 at least is the same topic.  Chapter 5 seems to start something new, and 6 seems to change the subject again, but is clearly connected to where 5 ends.  It's interesting.

In any case, we'll be looking at the 16 verses of chapter 2.  Perhaps we'll take 3 and 4 together, but that's for another week.  Focus on the elements in this chapter and read through them several times.  You may find it helpful to read 3 and 4, perhaps re-read 1, for context.  Look for elements that are different from 1 or build on things Paul said in 1.  If you read ahead, see what he does with the things in 2.  Jot down questions and observations about what he has in these 16 verses.

After going through this chapter several times, read back through with the questions below:

• Paul clearly builds of his contrast of the wisdom of God versus the world here.  Considering how involved these chapters are, what do you think of Paul's claim that he 'did not come with superiority of speech or wisdom'?
• Considering that in the previous chapter Paul says that God uses the foolish things of this cosmos to destroy the wise, what do you think of the content of Paul's message (verse 2)?  Why do you think the 'Crucified Messiah' would fit that description?
• The 'fear and much trembling' sounds weak.  What do you think it truly meant in Paul's message, why do you think he would tremble and be afraid?
• What sort of things do you think made up Paul's 'demonstration of the Spirit of power'?  You can find another reference like this in chapter 5 (verses 3-5).  How does that affect your understanding of what Paul means in chapter 2?
• In verses 6 through 9, who do you think are the 'rulers of this age'?  
• To whom did Paul speak of 'wisdom' and what what do you think he told them?
• In verses 10 through 16, Paul talks about the 'role' of the Holy Spirit. Consider where he starts, and the last statement in verse 16.  What do you think that means for us?
• These final verses contrast natural man and spiritual man.  Considering their view that the spiritual has nothing to do with the natural man (hence they can be immoral and not affect their spirit), what do you think about Paul's contrast?  How do you think the church accepted or understood this?

That should be plenty to discuss Thursday.  Remember to bring your questions and observations.