Global Misssions

Well, last week we looked at Jesus as the model for our mission endeavor, examining the pattern of his incarnate life and drawing out implications for our missionary practice.

! And this morning, in our companion study, if you will, we turn to the Apostle Paul with the same ambition.

How is the Apostle a model for us in our missionary lives?

Now, in some circles, when one moves from Jesus to Paul, it is often contrasts which are asserted, suggesting that Paul somehow strikes off on his own path, even departing from the patterns laid out by our Lord.

It is therefore worthwhile to commence our consideration of Paul by asking how, if at all, the Apostle took up the pattern established by Jesus, or did he depart from it in any way?

Do we find contrast, as is commonly alleged, or do we, in fact, see correspondence and continuum?

Now, in our study of Jesus last week, we drew our portrait from the Father's sending of the Son incarnationally, drawing out features from that astounding fact.

We observed that this involved a great going out, first of all.

The Son did not remain in heaven, but went out into the far country of humanity, seeking out the lost.

The gospel narratives, again and again, of Jesus are filled with a phrase,

and he went out, and he went out, and he went out.

Well, I ask you, could there be a more faithful and fervent follower of this model than the Apostle Paul going out to the far-flung Gentiles?

As he told the Romans, I make it my ambition to preach the gospel, not where Christ has already been named,

but to those who have never been told of him, Romans 15, 20.

And among his animating ambitions was to herald the gospel in Spain, which geographically would have been the end of the earth from him.

So no divergence from Jesus here.

We also observed of the Son's incarnation that he came in person.

His mission brought him face-to-face with those that he sought, involving a deep personal engagement.

And what of Paul's missionary practice?

Well, the phrase face-to-face is repeated again and again in his correspondence,

and not just as a formulaic expression, but as a principled commitment.

Given his familiarity with the inside of jails, he was at times kept from this desire,

torn away from you, brothers and sisters, for a short time,

in person but not in heart, as he described it to the Thessalonians.

But such separation was to him an anguish.

And he, quote,

endeavored the more eagerly and with great desire, as he told them,

to see you face-to-face.

First Thessalonians 2.

If he did have freedom,

he preferred prolonged stays to passing ones.

For, as he told the young Corinthian believers,

I do not want to see you just in passing.

I hope to spend time with you, if the Lord permits.

First Corinthians 16.

And as with the Master,

his personal engagement was thick, deep, rich, and devoted.

Being so affectionately desirous of you, he tells the Thessalonians,

we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God,

but also our very own lives,

because you had become so very dear to us.

First Thessalonians 2.8.

He likens his relationship, in that same verse,

to them as that of a nursing mother taking care of her own children.

Surely this reflects faithful correspondence to the pattern of the Master.

Paul loses no marks here.

We also noticed in the incarnation of the Son,

a deep identification with those to whom he came,

making himself like them in everything but their sin.

So how was the Apostle on following this particular melody?

To the Corinthians, he explained that

he sought to identify with and adapt to those that he sought to reach

in every possible way.

I have become all things to all people.

Now, since we will shortly comment further on this commitment,

as pretty much the compact articulation of his modus operandi,

we'll say no more at present,

but that Paul here embodies the pattern of Christ in excelsis.

We further noticed that the mission of Christ was marked by a pattern of

consistent and conspicuous self-emptying.

Was the Apostle a stranger to this?

Well, to the young believers in Philippi,

he describes his missional life as one great continued pouring out,

and compared it to a drink offering being poured out on the sacrificial offering of the Philippians' faith.

In other words, his life was a poured out libation to enhance the Philippians' offering of their lives to God.

Philippians 2.17.

And finally, we observed that the son's incarnational mission was marked by a stupendous costliness.

His life was that grain of wheat that fell to the ground and died to bring forth much fruit.

Well, do we catch an echo here in the missionary labors of the Apostle?

Well, as Paul explained to the Corinthians,

without the slightest trace of self-pity,

rather recognizing it as precisely the pattern of Christ and the purpose of God,

he writes,

So death works in me, but life in you.

2 Corinthians 4.12.

The spiritual life that came to the Corinthians came at a cost.

It cost the life of the Apostle,

the slow dying of the missionary.

In this, his missionary life is the perfect correspondence to the pattern of Christ.

So, when Paul described the Thessalonians as having become, quote,

imitators of us and of the Lord,

1 Thess 1.6,

he was not offering two divergent paths or models.

For the Apostle's missionary life was simply a reiteration of our Lord's missionary pattern.

He merely contextualized in its different settings the life of his Lord.

As he told the Corinthians,

imitate me as I imitate Christ, 1 Corinthians 11.1.

So, I think the conclusion, unavertible,

Paul's missionary model does not diverge from Christ's.

Christ was the very inspiration and exemplar for Paul.

Important to start with that because so often in the literature,

you see an emphasis of the contrast between the Apostle and Jesus.

But, far from this correspondence,

making Paul's model of missions merely reiterative,

the Apostle brings a singular theological acumen

in both his articulation and application

of Christ's incarnational-shaped mission.

And that's where we want to go.

Well, I'll just, as an illustration,

let's just take the last considered feature,

the stupendous costliness

of the incarnate mission of the Son.

Okay, how does Paul develop this?

How, in Paul's mind,

are Christ's disciples

to follow in Christ's footsteps

in regard to our Savior's suffering?

So, just an example of how he does theological development here.

There is theologically developed continuity,

but also contrast.

Paul tells the Corinthians,

we share abundantly in Christ's sufferings.

2 Corinthians 1.5.

Now, this phrase,

the sufferings of Christ,

or Messiah,

Christ simply Greek for Messiah,

is part of a broader understanding,

sometimes referred to as the Messianic woes.

Okay, this notion of the Messianic woes

was distilled from Old Testament prophets,

Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Hosea, Micah.

I can't develop that now,

but it was developed by Jewish teaching

and held that the triumphal Messianic age

would be preceded by woes.

In the Hebrew word,

it was basically birth pangs,

akin to the birth pangs

that a woman would suffer in labor.

Okay, and here's the interesting thing.

These Messianic woes,

this suffering would be endured

not by the Messiah himself,

but rather would be born

by those associated with him.

It's fascinating.

Now, the New Testament writers,

including Paul,

took this up,

a suffering intense,

but of fixed duration

and even fixed quantity,

which would be the lot

of Messiah's people,

that is,

Christ's disciples.

Christ's death and resurrection

had inaugurated the Messianic age

and his people,

living now in these last days,

were called to endure tribulation

in fulfillment of the scriptures

and in fulfillment of Jesus' own words

until the full measure

of this appointed suffering

was complete

and Christ returned.

Now, it's in this conceptual backdrop

that we have illuminated

Paul's otherwise cryptic statement

to the Colossians.

Do you remember that in Colossians 124

where Paul writes,

I do my share

of filling up

what is lacking

in Christ's afflictions?

There's Colossians 124

if you want to look there.

Now,

he is speaking

of these sufferings

of the Messiah

or these Messianic woes.

Now, notice significantly,

he says,

filling up.

Now, a filling up

implies that there is

a fixed amount.

He's referring

to the fixed measure

of the intense sufferings

that must be endured

by Christ's disciples

before Christ returns.

So, what is the sum

of suffering

that is to be endured?

Well,

it is the sum

of what it will cost

to deliver,

declare,

and display

the gospel

through the ends

of the earth,

both near and far.

As Jesus told his disciples,

the gospel of the kingdom

shall be preached

in the whole world

for a witness

to all the nations

and then

the end shall come.

Matthew 24, 14.

As Paul explains

again to the Colossians,

I fill up

what is lacking

in Christ's sufferings,

verse 24,

by,

he continues,

by filling up

or fully carrying out,

same word in the Greek,

by fully carrying out

the preaching

of the gospel,

verse 25.

Do you see that link?

See that link?

The way we fill up

the afflictions

of the Messiah,

the messianic woes,

is by fully carrying out

the preaching

of the gospel.

This is a wonderful

theological articulation.

You see,

according to Paul,

according to his insight

and understanding,

as disciples,

we enter into

a partnership

in suffering

with the Master.

That is indeed

what fellowship means.

It's partnership

in a cause.

The cause

is redemption.

And the disciple

partners with the Master

in paying the cost

of redemption.

redemption.

Now,

we need to be

really,

really careful here

and nuanced

because I don't want you

to misunderstand.

Both Christ

and his disciples

suffer

to reconcile

the world

to God,

to bring many

sons and daughters

to glory.

We suffer

in the same cause

as the Savior,

but our suffering

is not

of the same

character.

This is really,

really important

or we can kind of

go off the rails here.

The suffering

our Lord

endured

to bring many

to glory

none

but he

could bear.

He must

tread the wine

press alone

as Isaiah says

in Isaiah 63.3.

He alone

took the cup

of the Father's wrath.

So,

his sufferings

were

propitiatory.

The disciples

are

propagatory.

His,

the cost

of atoning.

Ours

is but

the cost

of announcing.

His,

the procuring

of a great salvation.

Ours,

merely

the proclaiming

and parading

that great salvation

to the ends

of the earth.

And yet,

our

part two

bears

a very

real

cost.

And it is

so fundamental

for our

discipleship,

for the disciple

to take up

that call

that Paul

can unpack

it,

what it means

as simply

knowing Christ

is to have

fellowship

in his sufferings.

That I might

know him,

Christ,

he writes

to the

Philippians,

Philippians 3.10,

that is

the fellowship

of his

sufferings.

So,

this then

is the call

of the disciple,

fundamentally.

The call

to partnership

in Christ's

sufferings.

The call

to take up

a share

of the

messianic

woes,

the painful

birth pangs

that are

bringing his

return

through

helping

fully

to carry

out

our gospel

mission.

It is

the mortification

of mission.

Whatever

pain and

suffering

comes to

us

in

faithfully

prosecuting

the gospel

mission.

Is that

not

marvelously

illuminating?

Is that

not

wonderfully

clarifying?

Thank you,

Paul.

These are

so helpful.

So,

even though

there's

perfect

continuity

and continuum

with Paul's

pattern

and Jesus'

pattern,

he articulates

it and

he applies

it so,

so helpfully.

So,

there's an

example.

But,

I want

to focus

on another

element

of model

missions

the apostle

offers us.

Paul is

the master

of what

we might

call

the

creative

contextualization

of the gospel.

That's what

I want us

to focus

on.

So,

let's

first

observe

his

practice

of

contextualization,

then clarify

the principle

behind the

practice,

and then

finally,

note some

of the

perfect

but precarious

balance

it achieves

that plots

a course

between two

perilous pitfalls.

apostles.

So,

that's where

we're going.

Okay.

So,

first,

the apostle's

practice

of creative

contextualization.

The apostle,

his adept

contextualization

could be

illustrated from

any number

of gospel

encounters

that the

narrative of

Acts

supplies.

I mean,

I wish

we had

a whole

month

to do

this.

But,

perhaps

Acts

17

serves

superlatively

to show

how Paul

adapts his

gospel message

to his

audiences.

So,

Acts 17.

You probably

know it

pretty well.

You can

open it

if you'd

like.

Now,

Paul would

be the

first to

insist

that there

is only

one

gospel.

You

recall his

vehement

assertion to

the Galatians

when astounded

that they

had so

quickly

defected

to,

quote,

a different

gospel,

not that

there is

another

one.

Galatians

1,

6,

and 7.

Now,

notice,

contained

in that

statement

is the

insistence

that anything

different

from the

one and

only gospel

is no

gospel

at all.

Okay,

so there's

just one

gospel.

Let that

be our

bedrock

as we

build our

understanding

of contextualization.

There is

but one

gospel,

and yet,

the one

and only

gospel can

be articulated

in different

ways,

and indeed

may well

need to be

articulated in

different ways

if it is to

gain a hearing

across diverse

audiences.

So Acts

17,

the chapter,

opens with

the apostle

declaring the

gospel to

a Jewish

or Jewish

adjacent,

maybe some

God-fearers,

Gentile God-fearers,

Jewish-adjacent

audience.

in the

setting of

a synagogue.

So how

does his

gospel

presentation

unfold there

in that

context?

Well,

Luke recounts,

he reasoned

with them

from the

scriptures,

from the

Jewish

scriptures,

explaining

and proving

that it

was necessary

for the

Christ to

suffer,

the Messiah

to suffer,

and to

rise from

the dead,

and saying,

this Jesus,

whom I

proclaim to

you,

is the

Messiah,

is the

Christ.

verses

one and

two.

In the

synagogue

setting,

the identity

of the

Messiah was

a burning

question.

And if

you wanted

to make

your case

credible and

compelling in

a synagogue,

you would

have to base

it on the

acknowledged

authority,

the scriptures,

the Jewish

scriptures.

And Paul had

become quite

skilled in

this approach,

and it proved

persuasive to

many,

as Luke

tells us.

But,

when he

travels on

to Athens,

he finds

himself in

a very

different

setting.

Not a

Jewish

synagogue,

but a

pagan

temple.

And as

well-versed

as Paul

surely was

in his

synagogue

evangelism,

he couldn't

just show

up and

then press

play.

Men of

Athens,

let us

take up

the burning

question of

the identity

of the

Messiah.

As you

well know,

Psalm 110

states,

no.

No,

this would

have been

utter gibberish

to the

Athenians.

The Greek

word for

Messiah meant

simply smeared

one.

And what is

this writing

he is referring

to?

No,

his audience

is coming

from such

a different

framework that

when he

speaks of

Jesus and

the resurrection,

they think

he's speaking

about two

deities.

Because in

their world,

usually deities

would show

up in

twos.

The major

deity in

his consort.

Jesus and

Anastasia,

resurrection.

Just thought

it was the

name of

his

concert.

Chrysostom

makes this

observation in

his writings.

And the

clue is

given,

he seems

to be a

preacher of

foreign

deities,

plural,

in verse

18.

That's how

garbled,

they're a

completely

different

framework.

Now,

Paul,

if he hopes

to be

comprehended

or even

given a

hearing,

he has

to adapt

to his

audience

and

recontextualize

his gospel

presentation.

He has

to connect

with something

that they

care about,

something native

to their

interests,

something expressed

in their

vernacular.

And this

is precisely

what he

does.

The cultural

portal he

finds for

the gospel

is the

aspiration in

Athenian

culture of

having a

comprehensive

catalog of

all the

deities.

You didn't

want to run

any risk of

leaving anybody

out because

they might

zap you

with ill

fortune.

So they

have to have

a complete

catalog.

Now,

picking,

I mean,

it's remarkable

how deft

a contextualization

he performs.

I mean,

this aspiration

that he latches

onto,

this aspiration

engages

with what

was culturally

pervasive.

It reflected

no eccentric

pocket of

interest.

Rather,

as he says,

as Luke

tells us,

the city

was full

of idols.

So he's

connecting with

something really

pervasive.

Neither was

it for the

Athenians a

matter of

tepid

indifference.

As Paul

observed,

they were

very religious,

verse 22.

Further,

it was a

matter around

which they

had acknowledged

and unresolved

questions.

As the

inscription read,

to the

unknown God.

They had

real questions

about this.

That's a

good way

to connect.

And he

connected with

deep streams

for it

contained

their

objects

of worship.

Anytime we

can figure

out what

the culture

worships,

we are

deeply

connecting.

So this

weaves a

rich fabric

of cultural

recontextualization

to embed

the gospel

in matters.

So when we

try to do

this,

we want

to try

to embed

the gospel

in matters

that are

to our

hearers,

pervasive,

prominent,

passion-laden,

puzzling,

and prized.

Those are the

things that we

want to connect

with.

And if we

fail to

recontextualize

the gospel,

connecting it

to matters

that matter

to our

hearers,

we will

simply,

and fatally,

reinforce a

sense,

perhaps even

a suspicion

or a

prejudice

on their

part,

that our

message is

utterly

irrelevant to

them.

Well,

there's so

much more

contextualizing

skill and

wisdom to

be culled

from Paul's

practice in

Athens.

You know,

you just

go,

there's so

much.

For instance,

he makes

his case

citing their

poets and

their

philosophers,

all kinds

of,

but we

must turn

to consider

to the

principle

behind the

practice.

The principle

behind the

practice.

His

principle

involves

motive,

aim,

and means.

Motive,

aim,

and means.

All

unfolded

in 1 Corinthians

9.

1 Corinthians

9.

Paul's

general

governing

principle

at the

fountainhead

of his

practice

is stated

in verse

23.

I do

all for

the sake

of the

gospel.

There's

the

motive.

That

could

well

serve

as the

apostle's

motto

inscribed

on his

missionary

travel

trunk.

I do

all for

the sake

of the

gospel.

And

for the

sake

of the

gospel,

he has

made

himself,

he says,

the servant

of all.

Verse

19.

And

this

universal

servanthood

is in the

service of

his aim.

verse 19.

To win

more to

Christ.

To win

more to

Christ.

And having

identified his

aim to win as

many as

possible to

Christ,

how does he

hope to

serve them

in order to

win them?

What means

does he

deploy?

Verse 20.

The next

verse.

To the

Jews, I

became as

a Jew

to win

Jews.

To those

outside the

law,

Gentiles,

as one

outside the

law,

like a

Gentile,

that I

might win

more of

them.

To the

weak,

I became

weak,

that I

might win

the weak.

That is,

Paul serves

them by

becoming

like

those he

seeks to

win.

That's how

he serves

them.

He adapts

himself to

them by

showing

sensitivity

and

versatility.

Sensitivity

and versatility.

Sensitivity.

What might

seem

unnecessarily

alien and

off-putting

to those I

seek to

win?

When I'm

with the

Jews, I

don't order

the pork

chop.

I keep

kosher.

That's

sensitivity.

When I'm

with the

Gentiles and

they offer

me a pork

chop, I

receive it

with thanks.

If the

pork chop

has been

offered to

an idol and

I happen to

be with one

who is of

tender conscience,

I turn it

down so as

not to be a

stumbling block.

And

Corinthians

expounds on

this.

Paul wants

to be aware

of any

and all

obstacles that

could be a

barrier to

their hearing

and embracing

the message

of Christ.

He doesn't

want to weigh

the gospel

down,

with a

host of

cultural

trappings.

He doesn't

want it to

appear or

be felt to

be more

alien than

it must

be.

And not

only is he

sensitive,

aware, he's

also versatile,

adaptable.

And not

only in his

person as

messenger,

standing with

his hearers in

solidarity, in

alignment with

kosher or

non-kosher,

Hebrew or

Greek,

the same

way that

Hudson Taylor,

you know,

pigtails and

platform shoes

in China,

just going to

blend in in

everything that

I can.

Not only in

his person,

but even in

the message

itself, not

just the

messenger, but

the message

itself,

adapting it

to the need

of his

hearers so

that it will

connect and

not confuse,

as we saw

demonstrated in

Athens so

marvelously.

Paul sits

loose to the

cultural trappings

as they are

not fundamental,

merely functional

for him.

Not fundamental,

merely functional.

He can present

Jesus as the

expected Messiah

in the synagogue

or as the

unknown God

at the

Necropolis.

Also,

is there not

something strange

about the

phrase,

to the Jews,

I became

a Jew?

Wait a minute,

Paul.

What do you

mean became a

Jew?

You are a Jew

of the tribe

of Benjamin,

a Hebrew of

Hebrews.

Yes,

but that's

not fundamental

to me.

I can

emphasize or

de-emphasize

that,

like a

cosmopolitan

can his

boyhood

accent.

Sometimes it's

useful in my

setting,

sometimes it's

not.

What I am

most fundamentally

is new

creation.

2 Corinthians

5,

17.

That is

my identity.

The Jew

or Gentile

bit is

largely

my

adaptability

for the

sake of

the gospel.

But of

course,

just because

these cultural

accessories are

not fundamental

doesn't mean

that they're

to be

despised.

Paul does

not relegate

to worthless

cultural

matters.

He simply

relativizes

them to

their missional

usefulness.

He asks,

what value

do they

have as

to my

aim for

winning

more to

Christ?

So,

for example,

though he

refused to

circumcise

Titus,

in Galatians

2,

3,

in order

to clarify

the gospel,

he thought

it useful

to circumcise

Timothy

to open

doors for

the gospel,

Acts 16,

1.

He states

his principle

tersely in

verse 22

of 1 Corinthians

9,

I have

become

all things

to all

that by

all means

I might

save some.

All things,

Paul?

That sounds

a rather

boundless

adaptability.

Well,

we notice

that he

feels free

to set

aside the

Jewish

law,

but he

clarifies

that is,

it is

not the

case

that

nothing

governs

me.

I am

not

outside

the

law

of

God,

but I'm

under

the

law

of

Christ,

verse 21.

So,

what bounds

this?

What bounds

this

adaptability?

We,

as

sensitive

and

adaptive

missionaries,

are

under the

standards

of our

Savior.

Paul

does what

he does

and how

he does

it

according

to the

pattern

of

Christ

and

his

gospel.

He

will

not,

nor

can

we,

for the

sake

of

the

gospel,

abandon

the

gospel

pattern

of

constraints.

Can't

do

that.

Like

Christ's

own

incarnational

identification

with us,

it is

in all

things

except

our

sinfulness.

Can't

adapt

to

that.

And

so,

in

seeking

to win

the

lost,

Paul

can

say,

to the

Jew I

became

as a

Jew,

to those

without the

law,

as without

the law,

to the

weak,

weak,

but he

cannot

say,

to the

drunk I

became a

drunkard,

to the

philanderer I

became a

philanderer,

to the

idolater I

became an

idolater.

Do you see

the difference

here?

Critical that

we get

that.

In our

zeal to

identify fully

with those

we seek

to win

to the

gospel,

we may

not

betray

the

gospel

itself.

So,

when Paul

declares,

I have

become all

things to

all people

that by

any means

I might

save some,

it's clear

that he

means by

all permissible

means,

any gospel

and cross

conforming

means.

Is that

clear?

Pretty

important.

Okay,

good,

good,

good,

good.

Well,

to further

refine our

grasp and

application of

Paul's

contextualizing

principle,

let's

consider one

final passage

which shows

how its

course is

cross-pressured

and sails

between a

fateful

scylla and

a fatal

charybdis.

So,

let us

finally observe

three,

the vital

balance

in contextualization.

The vital

balance in

contextualization.

1 Corinthians

1.

You might

want to

turn there.

1 Corinthians

1.

It's

Paul's

master

class

in the

subtleties

and sand

traps

of gospel

contextualization.

We find

Paul

having done

the thoughtful

cultural

analysis

required

of a

skilled

missionary.

He has

observed

and reflected

upon the

culture of

those he

seeks to

reach,

and he's

identified

some of

their

principal

values

and governing

concerns.

and these

will direct

and inflect

how he

will preach

the gospel

to them.

Here

is the

differentiating

sensitivity

and adaptability

that we've

observed.

So,

verse 22,

notice,

he's got his

cultural analysis.

Jews

demand

signs

and Greeks

seek

wisdom.

Two

different

things,

different

culture.

Sophia,

wisdom,

and

semion,

sign.

Sophia

and

semion.

The

Greeks

seek

an

explanation

of the

world.

The

Jews,

God's

intervention

in it.

The

Greeks,

they

seek

the

world's

pervading

principle

of

rational

meaning.

The

Jews,

a

mighty

demonstration

of

God's

saving

power

in the

world.

Get

these

nasty

Romans

off

our

back.

Now,

the

apostle

knows,

and I'm

sure you

know,

we know,

that

Jesus

is the

answer

to

both.

He

is

the

logos,

the

very

word

that the

Greeks

use for

the

primal

and

pervading

rational

principle

of the

cosmos.

I mean,

think John

1.

This is

why so

many

Stoics

came to

Christ.

Oh,

my

goodness,

the

logos is

personal.

We

never

thought

of

that.

Jesus

is also,

as Isaiah

wrote,

the arm

of the

Lord.

That

is,

the

acting,

saving

power of

God

come into

the

world.

Jesus

is both.

Oh,

wow,

there we

go.

One

might have

thought,

after that

analysis and

seeing,

oh,

I see

where I

can go,

you would

have thought

the apostle

would dive

right in

and show

Christ as

the fulfillment

of both

of these

longings,

wherever

they were

contextualized.

Clear

skies,

all clear

sailing ahead.

And yet,

if you have the

text in front

of you,

you'll

notice the

next word

in our

text is

but,

but,

all right?

And the

sentence

reads,

but,

we

preach

Christ

crucified,

a

stumbling

block to

the Jews

and a

folly to

the Greeks.

Verse 23,

if you're

following.

Whoa,

whoa,

whoa.

Is the

apostle

backing

away from

his cultural

contextualization

practice?

might appear

that way.

No,

I do

not believe

so.

Notice

that the

very next

word is

a further

but.

Okay?

Verse 24,

and the

sentence

reads,

but,

to those

who are

called,

both Jews

and Greeks,

Christ,

the power

of God,

and the

wisdom of

God.

Aha!

Here again

are those

resonant

categories

of this

cultural

analysis.

Do you

see that?

What's

going on?

The answer

is,

Christ

is

the

fulfillment

of these

cultural

longings,

but,

these

cultural

aspirations

have been

warped by

sin

and twisted

into

flesh-serving

idols.

And Paul

will

lovingly

serve

his fellows.

Remember,

I make

myself

servant

to all.

He will

lovingly

serve his

fellows

by confronting

their idols.

And confront

them

he must.

They must

be confronted

for we

are in

our

idols'

grip.

The reason

why the

idols have

such power

in culture

is that they

are functioning