Family Worship
Andy Beard
Luke 5:1-11 Family Worship Ideas

Bible Study notes on Luke 9:28-36

It is one of the most spectacular scenes in the entire history of creation.  As the veil of Christ’s humanity is lifted just a fraction, something of the glorious splendor of His divine nature blazes across the mountain top.  Luke links the incident with Jesus’ previous prediction of His own death and resurrection (9:22).  It’s a brilliant juxtaposition of the glory of Christ and His suffering.   And it inverts all our assumptions about power and glory (see Paul’s exploration of this same inversion in I Cor.1:18-31).

Moses and Elijah are temporarily recalled from the ‘realm of the dead’ for this immense conversation.  What would be a discussion worthy of being conducted in the presence of the glory of the Lord?  ‘They spoke about His [Exodus]’ (9:31, see footnote for strict translation of the Greek Luke uses).   This is just one of the overt ways Luke portrays Jesus here as the fulfilment of Moses.  Moses was the shadow of Jesus’ reality.  The glory of the Lord revealed, the reference to the Exodus, the Lord speaking to Moses atop a mountain, the cloud from which the Father speaks…  possibly even Peter’s blurting out about tents – it’s all meant to evoke the memory of the ancient Church’s deliverance from Egypt, from the land of slavery to sin, of death, of the tyranny of Satan.  And in collating these two moments, Luke is helping us to understand the significance of what Jesus is doing as He comes down from the mountain, and  ‘resolutely set out for Jerusalem’ (Lk.9:51). 

His is not coming to abolish the Law (Moses) and the Prophets (Elijah).  He is fulfilling them.  It is a moment witnessed and testified to by the Father Himself.  As He speaks from the cloud of glory, He gives His answer to the question that has lurked throughout the last couple of chapters: ‘Who do you say I am?’  We’ve heard the crowds, Herod, demons and even Peter offer an answer to this question.  But this is the answer given by the Father: ‘This is my Son whom I have chosen…’ (Lk.9:35).  It’s a deep declaration, reminding us of what the Lord has already said about the Messiah.  ‘Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him, and he will bring justice to the nations’ (see Is.42:1-7 cf. Matt.12:18-21).  Layer upon layer of significance is built up over the scene.

Having been confronted with the majesty and grandeur of who Christ is, the Father is clear about our response.  ‘Listen to Him’.  Peter’s confused outburst aside, this is the only posture we can realistically adopt before the Christ. 

 

Questions:

Why does Jesus take only Peter, James and John with him (9:28)?  Does it trouble you that Jesus had an ‘inner circle’ (see also 8:51)?  How do you think the other disciples felt about this arrangement?

Why do you think the disciples kept this to themselves (9:36)?   Wouldn’t that kind of behaviour simply exacerbate the division between these three and the rest?

Would it be appropriate for Church leaders today to follow Jesus’ example?  Why / Why not?

Why do you think it is Moses and Elijah who appear and speak with Jesus?  Why not Daniel… or Ezekiel… or Abraham… or David? 

What can we surmise about our experience of life after death from what we see of Moses and Elijah in this passage?

Listen to Him.  One of the earliest pieces of homework on DTP is to list (from memory) everything we know of Jesus’ teaching.  Why not try this as a Home Group?  What percentage of the speaking of Christ have we listened to so attentively that we have internalized it?

What do you think the Father means when He tells us to listen?  What does that entail?  How can we better listen to Christ at MIE?

 

Is Luke misquoting the Father (see Matt.17:5; Mark 9:7; II Pet.1:17)?   

Bible Study notes on Luke 9:18-27

The most intriguing word in this passage is ‘must’.   There is something essential and necessary, something non-negotiable about the suffering and death of Christ.  The One who has demonstrated His absolute authority over sin and storms, over disease, the demonic and even death itself is confronted with His own ‘must’.  The One who brings freedom, and who alone is free, is constrained by His own ‘must’.  He ‘must’ suffer; He ‘must’ be rejected’ and He ‘must’ be killed.   

It is the nature of who He is.  It is the purpose of creation.   One of the first things we learn in DTP is that the cross comes first in the heart and mind of God.  Then creation.  This is what Peter has to learn.  His vision of the Messiah has no room for suffering (see Mark 8:32).  He has learnt it by the time he writes his first epistle: …Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect.  He was chosen before the creation of the world… (1:19-20).   He was chosen as the Passover Lamb before the creation of the world.  Creation is what it is so that it can provide the arena for the cross.  Creation depends on His offering Himself up as a sacrifice.   It only makes sense if He does…

The other use of the word is equally arresting.  ‘Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves, and take up their cross daily and follow me’ (v.23). That’s not how we tend to understand the Gospel.  But Jesus is unequivocal.  Same absolute imperative that Jesus uses to describe the non-negotiable certainty that he must die, is the same absolute imperative He uses to describe what it means to be a Christian.  He then goes on to underline this with three other, equally dogmatic, assertions, each of which conflicts with our assumptions about what it means to follow Him.  This isn’t Jesus explaining how to become an ‘elite’ Christian; nor is it Him painting an optional extra level of spiritual seriousness.  This is the basic requirement for anyone who wants to follow Jesus. 

It's worth reflecting on why we are so fearful of Jesus’ vision of what it means to follow Him.  This is the same Jesus who centuries earlier has assured the Church: ‘“I am the Lord your God, who teaches you what is best for you…’ (Is.48:17).  It’s the kind of thing that sounds easy to believe, until He teaches us to take up our cross.  Is that really what is best for us?  Is this death to sinful self, is this denial of the world; is this losing of our lives for Him really what is best for us? 

 

Questions:

How would you answer the question of what it means to begin to follow Jesus?  Do you think He is exaggerating here for effect?

In what sense do we have to deny ourselves in order to follow Jesus (v.23)?  How has that worked out in your experience of discipleship?

What does this image of ‘take up your cross daily’ actually mean (v.23)?   

In what sense do we have to lose our lives for Christ (v.24)?  What does that look like in 21st Century Ipswich?

What does it mean to lose or to forfeit our very self (v.25)?

In what ways can we be ashamed of Christ and His words?  What would it mean for Christ to be ashamed of us ‘when He comes in His glory’ (v.26)?

How can MIE better equip us for this kind of Christianity?  Do you think this is the only option available for being a Christian? 

How can Jesus say that some will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God (v.27)?  Hasn’t that been proved patently false?

Bible Study notes on Luke 9:10-17

Isn’t it interesting how we can get bored of bits of the Bible?  I wonder how many of us rolled our eyes (at least internally) when we saw the reading was the ‘feeding of the 5,000’ – again.  It the only miracle recorded in all four Gospels, and it is a standard ‘go-to’ passage for All Age Services, Sunday Groups and School Assemblies / Collective Worship.  It is a passage that has been ridiculed and trivialized by scholars (and the preachers who read them and should really know better!).  The nonsense that has been preached on this miracle beggars belief: from the idea that the ‘miracle’ is in people learning to share previously hidden packed lunches (probably the most popular and the most inane), to the even more implausible idea that Jesus had a secret stash of bread and fish hidden in a nearby cave!

If you’ve been tracking with us in evening services, you’ll be tired of hearing me complain about how much damage we do to passages when we take them and turn them into children’s stories.  We lose so much, it’s hardly surprising that they become ‘boring’ to us.  When we put the Gospel accounts next to each other something far more disturbing and troubling emerges.  John’s account of Jesus’ teaching associated with this miracle and the chilling conclusion that ‘From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him’, should be enough to give us pause for thought!

It’s an incredibly profound and dynamic miracle in which Jesus is achieving multiple ends with a single means.  Luke focuses our attention not on Jesus’ challenge to the religious leaders, nor on the reaction of the crowds, or even the disciples.  He focusses tightly on Jesus’ ongoing training of the apostles for their mission.  It is clear that they have much to learn before they can be entrusted with proclaiming the Gospel of the Kingdom throughout the nations of the world!  And the fact that this miracle features in all the Gospels should alert us to how central it is in preparing the Church for their global mission.

Put in this context, it is possible that there is more here to learn than we anticipated…  which shouldn’t surprise us really.

 

Questions:

What would have previously said was the main point of this passage?

What is the key mistake the disciple make and that Luke sets out in 9:10?    How will the ‘feeding of the 5,000’ directly speak into this fundamental error?

In our own experience of mission, how do we make the same mistake?  What do we need to learn from this passage about our own outreach at MIE?  How should that outreach change in the light of Luke 9:10-17?

 

Why is Jesus willing to give up his time with His disciples in order to welcome the crowd?  How did the disciples feel about that shift in priorities?  What do we learn from this?

Based on what we’ve already heard from Jesus in Luke’s Gospel, what do you think was He was teaching them about the Kingdom of God? 

 

What do you make of alternative explanations of this passage that try to suggest there is no actual miracle being performed here?  What do you think drives people to ignore what the passage says and to come up with their own ideas?

Many Bible students suspect that Luke is comparing Jesus’ miracle to Moses (Ex.16) and / or Elijah (II Kings 4:42-44).  Why would Luke do this?  How would the comparison work, and what would it teach us about Jesus?  What then would be the significance of Moses and Elijah appearing later in Chapter 9 during the Transfiguration (9:30)? 

 

Why does Luke make the point that there were twelve basketfuls left over (9:17)?  Why does Jesus make this amount too much?

Bible Study notes Luke 9:1-9

There can be quite a lot of confusion about the place of the miraculous in evangelism.  For a while there was a way of thinking that was called ‘power evangelism’.  The idea was that if people saw the Church doing miraculous works, they would pay a lot more attention when we proclaimed the Gospel.  It’s strange how popular the idea became, given that Jesus shows us both in His own example of doing miracles, and in His teaching, that there is nothing about miracles per se that encourages belief.  Sometimes quite the opposite.  Jesus was the miracle worker par excellence and yet this didn’t cause people to trust Him any more, or indeed, even to  listen more carefully to what He said.   Indeed, Jesus specifically warns us that miracles don’t compel belief:  ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’ (Lk.16:31).

More than that, Jesus ties this use of miracles with false teachers and false messiahs against whom we should be on our guard. Mark 13:22, For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.

Still, there is a lingering suspicion in some corners of the Church that everyone should do the kind of miraculous things the Apostles are sent out to do.  It is rather hard to square this with the Bible’s teaching.  Passages such as Acts 2:43; 4:33; and Acts 5:12, are crystal clear that this was the experience of the apostles.  And in Acts 9:32-43, it is notable that the disciples are not themselves able to perform a miracle, but send for Peter – an apostle – who then raises Tabitha from the dead.

Paul later explains the role of miracles in the experience of the Apostles: I persevered in demonstrating among you the marks of a true apostle, including signs, wonders and miracles (II Cor.12:12).   

Which is not to say the Spirit doesn’t work miraculously today.  Both within Scripture and in our own experience we know that there are times when the Spirit works (sometimes in answer to prayer) in ways that transcend human understanding.  Contrary to some inflated claims, this does not mean that we have apostle-like power delegated to us.  It simply means that in His grace, the Lord achieves His purposes, whether through what we think of as ‘natural’ means, or ‘supernatural’ means. 

 

Questions:

Why is mission one of the first things Jesus teaches His disciples? 

Is proclaiming the Gospel in this way a priority for every Christian, or just for the Apostles?

If this is so important, how would you make sense of a Christian, or a Church, where proclaiming the Gospel wasn’t integral to everything they did?

Do you think all Christians are able to do the kind of miraculous works we see the Apostles do?  Are we all given ‘power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases’ (Lk.9:1)?

In what sense are the apostles foundational to the mission of the Church?  Why do they need authenticating in this way?  What benefit is that authentication to the Church?

What is Jesus teaching His disciples by sending them out on mission with ‘no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra shirt’ (Lk.9:3)?  How can we learn the same lessons today?

What does it mean to ‘shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them’ (Lk.9:5)?  Is this something we should do when people refuse the Gospel?  What would it look like today?

What benefits might there have been if Jesus had granted an audience with Herod (Lk.9:9)?  Why does Jesus not let Herod see him even when Herod tried to?  Are there people like this we know today?  Should we treat them in the same way?

Bible Study notes Luke 8:40-56

Perhaps nothing is so fearful as disease and death.  We live under the shadow of our vulnerability and mortality.  A moment can change our whole experience of life.  We can feel so powerless before circumstances beyond our control.  Few chapters of the Gospel underline how different Jesus’ experience of life in this world can be from ours.  Luke 8 has taken us on a tour of the comprehensive authority Christ has over all the consequences of the fall, that precisely seem to have authority over us: the cursedness of creation; the demonic and the unclean; and now over physical sickness and death. 

We are utterly helpless as we face death, even when we have significant social, financial, cultural or even religious status.  Death is the great leveler.  Jairus is a man of high standing.  Yet he falls at the feet of Jesus in a humility born of desperation.  It is likely that he had done all he could, and now in despair he clings to one last hope.  It is hard to imagine how difficult this is for a Synagogue Ruler.  John 9:22 tells us that ‘the Jewish leaders … had decided that anyone who acknowledged Jesus to be the Messiah would be put out of the synagogue’. 

And it is hard to imagine the frustration he must have felt, having sacrificed everything, his last hope is delayed because of someone else who needed healing.  Jesus’ journey is interrupted by a nameless woman.  She seems to be presented as the very opposite of Jairus.  She has nothing.  It is not only her health and money that has been taken from her, but the flow of blood would have rendered her unclean and so she has also lost her status and belonging in the Jewish community.  But she and Jairus have this in common, they both fall before Jesus.  It turns out He too is a great leveler!

Jairus’ frustration and anger must have been all too evident as – seemingly as a result of this delay – ‘someone’ comes from his house to tell him it is too late.  And Jesus speaks directly to it.  Without apology or explanation, He simply tells Jairus not to jump to conclusions: Don’t be afraid.  Just believe.  She will be healed (8:50).  Jesus has options open to Him that we could never anticipate.  For us death is inevitable and irrevocable.  But for Jesus, even death is not the end it appears to be.

 

Questions:

How do you account for the differences in the way Jesus is treated on either side of the lake (8:37 & 40).  How sincere, and how well informed is this ‘welcome’? 

What is the difference between the way the ‘crowd’ were touching Jesus, and the way the ‘woman’ touched his?  What is it that alerts Jesus and provokes His response (v.45)?

Why does it matter that this healing is made a public matter?  Wouldn’t it have been better for Jesus to protect her anonymity? 

 

Is Jesus teaching us that if we have faith we will be healed (v.40)?  What is the connection between this woman’s faith and her healing?

How do you think Jairus felt when Jesus spoke to him in v.50?  What did he think?  What was he expecting?

Why doesn’t Jesus let anyone come in with Him except Peter, James and John (v.51)?  What is different that Jesus wants privacy for this miracle, when he had demanded a public dealing with the woman?

Some people conclude from v.52 that when we die we enter a ‘sleep-state’ that renders us unconscious until the Day of Resurrection.  Do you think this is what Jesus is teaching?  Why does He say she is asleep?  In what sense is she not dead?

What do you think v.55 means?

Do you think it is a coincidence that the woman has been bleeding for 12 years (v.43) and that the girl who dies is also ‘about twelve’ (v.42)?  What does the proximity of these two miracles teach us?

Why is Luke working so hard throughout Chapter 8 to establish Jesus’ absolute authority? 

Bible Study notes Luke 8:26-39

You might remember from our previous excursions in Luke’s Gospel that he enjoys presenting Jesus as the fulfilment of the role of priest.  What the Levitical priests did in shadow / drama from, Jesus does for real.  This week’s passage is ‘Jesus-as-Priest’ par excellence!

Leviticus is a lived-in drama.  Under Moses, God has put the ancient Church into a kind of school.  It’s a period of training to help the Church through all ages to understand and believe the Gospel.  It’s a brilliant multi-sense, immersive vision of every aspect of life that teaches us how to live that life in light of the Gospel.  Lev.11-15 deals with the question of unclean – clean – holy.  This can be a difficult concept for Christians today to grasp.  It isn’t about whether someone is a Christian or not (Christians can be ‘unclean’ and non-Christians can be ‘clean’).  It’s about how to live in a fallen world.  There is a powerful picture of the way what is unclean (death, decay, and the curse) keeps trying to break into the ‘clean’ life of the Church and to reclaim it.  It is the job of the Levitical Priest to keep what is ‘unclean’ out of the ‘clean’ arena of life provided by the Church.  And when it does break in, the priest is to put it back out again.

In a world interpreted through a Leviticus-lens, the situation confronting Jesus is one of compounded uncleanness.  This is a man inhabited by not just one demon, but a legion of them (the ESV helpfully translates them as ‘unclean’ where NIV has ‘impure’ in 8:29).  And the man’s internal condition is matched by his external surroundings.  He lives amongst death.  Mark tells us he cuts himself (Mk.5:5, with loss of blood symbolizing loss of life, and therefore a tending toward death); he is likely in a ‘Gentile’ area, suggested by the presence of so large a herd of pigs (likely a town-wide economy; and pigs being ‘unclean’ because they eat corpses, i.e. feed on death).   And the situation has continued for a long time (8:27). 

But Jesus is the Priest, charged with driving back the darkness of death and curse.  He alone can make someone clean.  And He does.  This section of Luke’s Gospel is often presented as demonstrating the authority of Jesus over all of creation: Seen (8:22-25) and unseen (8:26f.).  And it does.  But it does more: it shows us what Jesus uses that authority to achieve!

 

Questions:

What do you believe about demons?  DO such beings exist?

 What would you say to someone who suggested that this whole passage is simply a first-century way of describing a phenomenon that we would now understand in medical or psychological terms?

What does it mean to talk about someone being ‘possessed’ by a demon / impure spirit in this way?  Do you think demons still oppress or possess people today?  What would that look like?  How should the Church respond?

Why do you think the [legion of] demons are afraid Jesus would ‘torture’ them (v.28).  Is that the sort of thing Jesus does? …or will do?

What (and where) is ‘the Abyss’ (v.31)?  Why are the demons so fearful of being sent there?

How can we justify Jesus’ permitting the demons to enter and destroy a herd of pigs in this way?  Why is Jesus willing to act in a way that results in the death of so many animals?

Why are the people afraid of Jesus (v.37)?  Is this the same ‘fear’ that the disciples felt in 8:25?  Should ‘fear’ be part of our response to Jesus?  …and why is Jesus so willing to consent to their rejection of Him (v.37)?

Why is Jesus willing to grant every request made of Him in this passage, except that of the man who has just become a disciple?

How does Jesus’ authority over the demonic affect our experience of discipleship?  What does it mean when we commit Christians in our baptism liturgy to ‘fight against…the devil’?

Bible Study Notes Luke 8:22-25

As we jump back into Luke’s Gospel we find ourselves on (overly?) familiar territory.  There is a danger that we are so used to the story of Jesus calming the storm that we simply reflex into what we assume it means…  Jesus calms storms.  I doubt that at MIE anyone would apply this by asking what storms are there in your life, because Jesus can calm them too??  I hope that isn’t where we end up!  If for no other reason than the simple observation that it was Jesus who sent them into the storm in the first place.

There are a lot of good things to take away from the passage.  We began to look at the question of faith in our service on Sunday.  But as with any story in a Gospel, there is always more going on.   We’ll look at a number of different elements in this study, but let’s focus on Jesus as we introduce our time together.  The question we are invited to ask is: Who is this?  He commands even the winds and the water and they obey Him (v.25).

Sigmund Freud got many things wrong!  Among them is his theory of religion.  He posited that the growth our religiosity was an evolutionary response to a primal fear of nature.  Realizing that the world was a frightening place to live, humanity began to hope that there might be someone or something that could protect them from the elements, from earthquakes, from volcanoes, from … well, storms.  And thus was born the idea of God.  Like I said, he got many things wrong – at least in terms of Christianity! 

Do you look at the disciples at the end of this passage and think that here are people who are comforted by the idea that Jesus might be God?  Not so much.  If anything, they are more afraid of Jesus than they were of the storm.

It does raise interesting questions about our sense of who Jesus is.  Are we, as Freud imagined, simply those who come to Jesus for comfort, for some sense that someone is watching over us, protecting us, shielding us for a brutal and painful world?  Is it wrong to expect that from Christ?  Or are we those who have been gripped by a sense of Him as Creator and Sustainer of all that is?  And are we amazed and fearful at such a One?

 

Questions:

Do you think Jesus knew there would be such a furious storm when He told the disciples to set sail to the other side of the lake? 

Why is Jesus content to sleep while the disciples are in ‘great danger’?  What does His capacity to sleep through a storm reveal about Jesus and His mindset?

Why does Jesus rebuke the disciples?  Come to think of it, why does He ‘rebuke’ the storm (v.24)?

What is it about their behavior that demonstrates their lack of faith?   What would the presence of faith have looked like? 

What mistakes did the disciples make in this incident?  What is Jesus seeking to teach them?  How could we learn this lesson today? 

Is MIE a place where your faith grows?  How would you measure that?

Stormy seas are consistently used as an image of the nations in turmoil as they rail against the Lord (see e.g. Is.17:12-13; Is.57:20; Rev.17:15).  Do you think this imagery lies behind the story of Jesus calming the ‘raging waters’?  How would that affect how you read the account?

Is it a good thing that they are ‘in fear’ of Jesus?  …and that they are ‘amazed’ at Him?  Should fear and amazement characterize our response to Jesus today?  Does it?

Have a look at Heb.1:2-3, and 1:10-11.  What is the relationship between Jesus and Creation?  How should that affect your attitude to Jesus? …and to Creation? 

Given what we are taught about Jesus’ relationship with Creation here, how should Christians engage with the ‘environmentalism’? Where can we agree with environmentalism, and where must we disagree? What is distincitvely Christian about our views?

Home Group Notes Eph.2:11-22

Paul’s vision of the gospel and its work is global.  He is gripped by a vision of a truly international Church that has been reconciled and united to God and to one another through the Cross of Christ (a foretaste and foreshadowing of Eph.1:10). 

But it is important to notice the order in which things happen.  We might think that we are reconciled to God in Christ first, and then on that basis we are reconciled to each other across racial and cultural boundaries.  But in fact, the order is the way round.  We are reconciled to each other first, and then together ‘in one body’ we are reconciled to God through the cross (2:16).  The mechanics of the Cross mean that we cannot be reconciled to God without being reconciled to each other.  The two are inevitably intertwined. 

This is God’s vision of Church, a gloriously international phenomenon in the light of which all secular visions of multi-culturalism, failing as they are, pales into insignificance.  Again we find the Church answering the highest aspirations of our society.   Only in Christ is such a vision achievable.  Indeed, in Christ it is inevitable.

There is only one way to the Father, and it is together, through the cross, and by the Spirit (2:13 & 18).  And we must come this route whatever tribe, tongue, language or people we are from.   But even such a miracle as this is not an end in itself.  It is a thing of incredible beauty, but the goal is not merely for us to become fellow-citizens, or even members of His household.  It is that in Christ, we together become a ‘holy Temple’, a ‘dwelling in which God lives by His Spirit’.  We are caught up together into the life and the mutual indwelling of the Living God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.  As I often say, this vision of God who has community built into His very being is the basis on which we can be brought together in unity without being pressed into uniformity, and in which we can celebrate our diversity without that leading to division.

 

Questions:

What do you make of Paul’s description of Gentiles before they are brought near by the blood of Christ (2:12-13)? 

What is ‘circumcision’ all about, and why is Paul making a big deal of it here (2:11)?  And what is the problem when it is only done by human hands?  What does ‘circumcision of the heart’ look like (Deut.30:6; Jer.4:4; Rom.2:29)? 

In what sense has Christ set aside the Law (2:15)?  And in what sense is He not setting it aside (so Matt.5:17)?

Would you have said that His purpose in going to the cross was to create ‘one new humanity out of the two’ (2:15)?  What do you think Paul means by this?  How can we contribute to this, or experience this more fully at MIE?

How does Christ come and preach peace (2:17)? 

What does it mean to you that you are ‘fellow citizens with God’s people and members of His household’ (2:19)?  How do these images shape your thinking about being a Christian, and being a member of a Church?

How do ‘the apostles and prophets’ function as a foundation for the Church (2:20)?  And how does Jesus function as ‘the chief cornerstone’?

How do we experience the Lord’s building us together to become a dwelling in which God lives by His Spirit (2:22)?  What is that like at MIE?  What can we point to that suggests we are a ‘holy Temple’, or that God is present by His Spirit?

Home Group Notes Eph.1:3-14

Anyone who reads St. Paul’s epistles knows he had a rare gift for crowding a huge number of thoughts into a remarkably few number of words.  Perhaps this is nowhere more evident than in this opening chapter of the Book of Ephesians.  Paul grapples with limits of human language as he seeks to convey the immensity of God’s work in, and purposes for us, and indeed in all creation.  It’s important that we recognize that Paul’s teaching is rooted in and leads to worship (Eph.1:3 & 6).  Things go awry quickly when we don’t see the connection between doctrine and devotion.

It's such an important passage in the midst of a series such as the one we are doing in the run up to Easter.  We have been reflecting on different dynamics in God’s work at the cross, this creation-defining moment when the Son offers Himself unblemished, by the Spirit, to the Father (Heb.9:14).  We have a fatal propensity to reduce everything – even something as vast as the death of Christ – to the confines and limits of our own experience of life.  What does this mean for me?  … or perhaps what does it mean for my Church?  Paul won’t let us be so minimalistic.  It isn’t that the Cross has nothing to say to our personal experience.  Rather, the problem is that if we confine our thinking, worship and vision to that we end up with a truncated and disfigured idea of what is going on.  And that will hinder our whole discipleship project.  We end up seeing things like ‘adoption’ (Eph.1:5), ‘forgiveness’ (Eph.1:7), and ‘redemption’ (Eph.1:7) as ends in themselves.  We even end up thinking that ‘grace’ itself finds its terminus in me.

Paul refuses to let us be so parochial.  He puts the Cross, the shedding of Christ’s blood, in the context of God’s purposes for the whole of creation.  Purposes that stretch back before its beginning and that will continue into the everlasting ages of its renewal.  Purposes that cannot be derailed or disrupted.  When we become Christians, we don’t invite the Living God in our lives and plans, as if we fit Him into what we already have going on.  We are invited and included in His life and His plans and purposes for all of creation.  And grasping that give us a very different perspective on what is happening when we are ‘included in Christ’ (Eph.1:13), and what inevitably follows. 

 

Questions:

How does words like ‘chosen’ (1:4 & 11) and ‘predestined’ (1:5 & 11) make you feel as a Christian?  Do they connect with worship (1:3 & 6), and your sense of God’s love (1:5) in the way we see in Paul, or does it cause you anxiety and concern? 

What is the Father’s purpose in choosing us from before the creation of the world (1:4)?  What do you think Paul envisages in that?  How is it reflected in your own life as a Christian, and in your involvement in MIE?

How many ‘spiritual blessings in Christ’ (1:3) can you identify in this passage?  How would you explain them to someone who wasn’t a Christian?

What is God’s will and purpose for creation?  How should that shape the way we engage with Church life? 

How are people included in God’s purposes for creation?  How does that affect our idea about what it means to be a Christian… or to be part of a Church?

How does the Cross fit into those purposes?

Why is the Holy Spirit described as ‘a seal’ (1:13), and a deposit (1:14)?  How does that shape our expectations of our experiencing His presence?  What would someone be like if they really understood these elements of the Spirit’s ministry amongst His people?

What is ‘our inheritance’ (1:14) that the Spirit guarantees?  Why does Paul talk about those who will inherit as ‘those who are God’s possession’ (1:14)?  How do you feel about that?

 

Home Group Notes I Cor.10:14-17

What happens when we take Communion together?  It’s a moment that remains one of the most profound moments in Christian worship.  Precisely because it is so profound, it is at the same time fraught with danger and potent with blessing.  The 39 Articles of the Church of England pick up this exact passage (I Cor.10:16) when they teach us: ‘The Supper of the Lord is not only a sign of the mutual love that Christians ought to have among themselves.  Rather it is a sacrament of our redemption through Christ’s death.  To those who rightly, worthily and with faith receive it, the bread that we break is a partaking of the body of Christ, and similarly the cup of blessing is a partaking of the blood of Christ’ (Art.28).  Article 29 by contrast warns that ‘those who lack a living faith … are in no way partakers of Christ.  Rather, by eating and drinking the sign or sacrament of so great a thing, they bring condemnation on themselves’. 

The significance of taking Communion is so dramatic because in this act of worship, the Spirit is deeply present joining us in the death of Christ, such that we ‘participate’ in His body and blood.  Put another way, the bread and wine – by the working of the Holy Spirit – convey to us the reality of what they symbolize.

But it isn’t just that through Communion the Spirit binds us to Christ.  He binds us to each other.   Communion is never an individual thing.  As we’ll see in the ‘Hour before the Cross’ on Good Friday, our relationship to each other is in focus every bit as much as our relationship with Christ.  ‘We who are many are one body, for we all share the one loaf’ (I Cor.10:17).  We do not come to the Cross alone. 

The fact that this is Spiritual doesn’t make it any less real.  Paul shifts seamlessly into warnings about demonic involvement (10:18-22), and later to weakness, illness and even death resulting from abusing the Lord’s Supper (11:30-31).  Christian spirituality is physical, and it refuses to be confined to one isolated arena of our experience.

 

 

Questions:

Do you think Christ by His Spirit is present at Communion in a way that He isn’t at any other time?  …or perhaps: that you are present by the Spirit with Christ at Communion in a way that you aren’t at any other time?

When have you experienced Christ’s presence in Communion in a unique way?

What does Art.28 mean when it warns us to receive the Bread and Wine ‘rightly, worthily and with faith’?  How can we be sure we are receiving Communion in such a manner?

Do you think people would still be in danger – spiritually or physically – if they took Communion inappropriately? 

 

Paul’s language throughout I Corinthians reveals a multi-facetted understanding of Communion and the relationship of the Bread and Wine to Cross and to the Church.   

In what sense are we proclaiming (I Cor.11:26) the Lord’s death when we repeat this meal?  In what sense are we ‘remembering (I Cor.11:24-25) His death?  Why is it important that we do these?

Does Paul suggest something more than proclaiming and remembrance is going on in I Cor.10:16?  What does he mean by ‘participating’?

 

What is the connection between taking Communion and the unity of the Church as the Body of Christ?   

Is there a time when you should refrain from taking communion?  …or when someone shouldn’t be allowed to take communion?

Given Paul’s connecting Communion with unity, are there any conditions under which we should refuse to take communion with someone?  

How would it affect you / the Church if you took Communion whilst not in communion with others in the Church?

Home Group Notes I Cor.1:18-31

Sometimes a passage is difficult because it contains a lot of ideas in a small space, or because of the intensity of the logic.  Sometimes they are difficult because they prove so incisive and challenging that we kind of sub-consciously protect ourselves against what they are saying: we won’t let ourselves understand what is being said because the consequences are more than we can deal with.

If my own experience is anything to go by, we’re dealing with the latter scenario as we turn to I Cor.1:18-30.  We are so susceptible to the same temptation, to making the same mistakes, as Corinth.  We have a (well-intentioned) desire for the Church to be influential in the world.  We often want the Church to have a kind of cultural credibility, financial clout, or political influence.  Or if we are a bit more subtle, we long to see a more overtly ‘spiritual’ power.  We want people to think the Church is relevant and accessible (in a bygone generation we might even have said ‘cool’).  We want people to be impressed.  We want to be seen as rational and educated and sophisticated.  For the good of the Gospel, of course.

We are, in other words, very Corinthian. 

And Paul has little patience with such spiritual posturing.  We cannot preach the Gospel using methods that critically undermine that Gospel.  And a community brought into being by the cross must not reject being shaped by that cross.   The end does not ever justify the means when it comes to the economy of God. 

Paul is challenging that whole way of thinking…  and is calling us back to a humble dependence on the Holy Spirit and the Gospel of Christ…  that affects how we present ourselves and how we are perceived.  Paul categorically rejected everything that his culture would have considered essential to getting a message across effectively.  He consciously rejected the wise and persuasive, and relied instead on a ‘demonstration of the Spirit’s power’ (2:4).  It is when we have lost the Spirit’s power that we rely on production values, marketing techniques and cultural credibility.   Which is ironic, because often Churches that shape themselves in these ways are most vocal about their experience of the Spirit’s power!

 

Read I Cor.1:18-31

 

Where do we see the Church today aspiring to use the ‘power’ and ‘wisdom’ of the world in its evangelism and worship?   Why is this so compelling to Christians?

 

Is it legitimate for a Church to do this, or is it sinful? 

 

What would you say to someone who decided they were going to start going to a Church that was embracing such techniques?

 

Do you think Paul is unduly pessimistic about humanity’s pursuit for knowledge of God?  What about those who are sincerely seeking God?

 

Why has God made truth so obscure and elusive?  Why is our ‘boasting in the Lord’ so important?

 

Do you think God is deliberately frustrating humanity in their search for truth?  Can you show why you think what you do from this passage?  If you think the answer is ‘Yes’, why would God do that? 

 

If ‘demanding signs’ is a bad thing, what do you make of the idea that people would become Christians if they saw more miraculous signs?

 

If ‘wisdom’ is a bad thing, do you think we should work hard at explaining what we believe and why we believe it?  What does Paul have in mind when he talks about wisdom?  What might be a contemporary equivalent?

 

Why do you think Paul is so derogatory about the Church (v.26-27)?

 

How does this passage affect our approach to evangelism? 

(When you have answered this question, read I Cor.2:1-5.  Does that change your answer in any way?)

 

What would a Church be like that followed Paul’s teaching and example?  Where do you think we have this right at MIE?  …and where do we have it wrong?