Biblical Reasons for Withdrawing from a Member of the Church

     The following sins are specifically identified in the NT as offences requiring disciplinary action: a private trespass against another with an unwillingness to repent (Matt. 18:15-17); causing divisions and offences contrary to biblical teaching (Rom. 16:17-18); sexual immorality, covetousness, idolatry, reviling, drunkenness, extortion (1 Cor. 5:11); strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambitions, backbiting, gossip, arrogance, disturbances, impurity, fornication and lewdness (2 Cor. 12:20-13:2); all uncleanness, filthiness, foolish talking, coarse jesting (Eph. 5:1-7); disorderly conduct, refusing to work, meddling, freeloading (2 Thess. 3:6-15); rejecting the faith [straying from the truth, causing others to stumble] (1 Tim. 1:18-20; cf. 2 Tim. 2:14-18); not consenting to sound doctrine (teaching otherwise), pride, being obsessed with disputes and instigating senseless controversies, seeking gain from godliness (1 Tim. 6:3-5, KJV); vanity, greed, boasting, blasphemy, disobedience to parents, being unthankful, unholy, unloving and unforgiving, slander, without self-control, brutality, despising good, betrayal, stubbornness, haughtiness, loving pleasure rather than loving God, having a form of godliness but denying its power (2 Tim. 3:1-5); being factious (Titus 3:10-11); and not abiding in the doctrine of Christ (2 John 9-11). To this list could be added offences which have provoked direct discipline from God, such as: lying (Acts 5:1-11); profaning the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:27-34); opposing the Lord’s work (2 Tim. 4:14-15); forsaking biblical love (Rev. 2:4-5); tolerating false teaching (Rev. 2:14-16, 20); spiritual lifelessness (Rev. 3:1-3); apathy and self-satisfaction (Rev. 3:15-19).

     These lists of sins, however, are more representative than they are comprehensive. The Bible contains other examples of soul-condemning offences, which would obviously require disciplinary action (e.g. 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:19-21; Col. 3:5-9; 1 Tim. 1:9-11; Rev. 21:8; et al.). But the broad statement in 2 Thessalonians 3:6 serves as a good general framework. The all-embracing “every brother” leaves no room for favoritism. The phrase “walks disorderly” (or “leads an unruly life”) indicates that the offence is ongoing rather than occasional or accidental. While the particular disorderly conduct addressed in this context is idleness and meddling (v. 11), the word ataktôs itself refers to “a disorderly or an irresponsible manner.” It was originally a military term used of a soldier who was out of step, not keeping rank, or insubordinate (cf. H. K. Moulton Greek Lexicon 58), and in 1 Thess. 5:14 the noun form (ataktos) is translated “unruly.” The misconduct is further identified by Paul as behavior “not according to the tradition” received. The word “tradition” (paradosis) refers to the teaching which Paul had received from the Lord and passed on to others, and includes the entire body of Christian doctrine (1 Thess. 2:13-17; cf. 1 Cor. 11:2; 15:3).

     That an exhaustive list of sins was not intended (or even necessary) is demonstrated by general expressions such as the following: “and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine” (1 Tim. 1:10), “and the like” (Gal. 5:21), “any trespass” (Gal. 6:1), etc. So with a good knowledge of scripture along with basic common sense and mature reasoning (Heb. 5:14), any offence requiring church discipline ought to be “clearly evident” (cf. 1 Tim. 5:24; Gal. 5:19).

--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts: Church Discipline, When a Family Member is Disciplined, Not Keep Company With/Admonish as a Brother

Image credit: https://dg.imgix.net/advice-for-better-bible-memory-ps87xvba-en/landscape/advice-for-better-bible-memory-ps87xvba.jpg?ts=1460059794&ixlib=rails-2.1.4&w=1600&h=900&auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=min

Aristarchus

     Aristarchus was a Macedonian [Eastern European] from Thessalonica (Acts 19:29; 20:4; 27:2), potentially converted during the brief evangelistic campaign of Paul, Silas, and Timothy in the year 50 (Acts 17:1-10) and among the disciples addressed in the Thessalonian letters (1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1). He appears to have been an ethnic Jew (Col. 4:11). He went on to travel and work with Paul in Macedonia, Asia, and all the way to Judea (Acts 19:29; 20:4–21:15). He then accompanied Paul and Luke from Caesarea (Acts 27:2) across the Mediterranean Sea and was thus involved in the violent storm and subsequent shipwreck at Malta, arriving in Rome in spring 60 (Acts 28:16).

     Aristarchus was still with the apostle when the prison letters were written (ca. spring 62), acknowledged in Col. 4:10 as Paul’s “fellow prisoner” [sunaichmálōtos]. It is unclear whether this is to be taken literally or metaphorically. The same description is used of Epaphras, “my fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus” (Philem. 23), although the qualifying phrase “in Christ Jesus” is not included in Aristarchus’ description. Earlier, when the apostle was still a free man, Andronicus and Junia were described as his “fellow prisoners” (Rom. 16:7).

     Aristarchus was also included among Paul’s “fellow workers” [sunergoí] (Philem. 24),¹ associated with Tychicus, Onesimus, Jesus-Justus, Epaphras, Mark, Demas, and Luke (Col. 4:7, 9, 11, 12, 14; Philem. 23-24), as well as Gaius of Macedonia, Sopater, Secundus, Gaius of Derbe, Timothy, Tychicus, and Trophimus (Acts 19:29; 20:4).

     From the very beginning of his Christian walk, Aristarchus knew that being a follower of Christ, and especially a minister of the gospel, was hard (cf. Acts 17:5-10; 1 Thess. 1:6; 2:14). Nevertheless, he left his home to serve alongside the apostle Paul and other dedicated servants to expand the borders of God’s kingdom. According to tradition, Aristarchus died as a martyr during Emperor Nero’s persecution (ca. 64-68). We appreciate the life he lived and the service he rendered, and we give honor to whom honor is due.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnote:

     ¹ Cf. also Rom. 16:3, 9, 21; 2 Cor. 1:24; 8:23; Phil. 2:25; 4:3; Col. 4:11; 1 Thess. 3:23; Philem. 1; 3 John 8.

Related Posts: Epaphroditus, Silas/Silvanus, Titus 

Image credit: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/52/70/65/527065182e6afe935f538f5e84762645.jpg

Epaphroditus

     In Paul’s letter to the saints at Philippi, after an extensive commendation of Timothy, he commends a brother named Epaphroditus:

I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus my brother and fellow worker and fellow soldier, and your messenger and minister to my need, for he has been longing for you all and has been distressed because you heard that he was ill. Indeed he was ill, near to death. But God had mercy on him, and not only on him but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow. I am the more eager to send him, therefore, that you may rejoice at seeing him again, and that I may be less anxious. So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men, for he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life to complete what was lacking in your service to me. (Phil. 2:25-30 ESV)

     The name “Epaphroditus” is of Greek origin, a combination of epí [“on,” “against”] + Aphrodítē [goddess of love, beauty, and pleasure]; a fairly common name, meaning “lovely” or “charming.”¹ Apparently Epaphroditus is the letter carrier, and the apostle makes it clear that Epaphroditus’ return is not Epaphroditus’ idea. Rather, it was “necessary” for Paul to “send” him, giving him an even more elaborate commendation than he had given Timothy.

Connection to Paul

     Epaphroditus is described as Paul’s “brother,” an appellation that E. E. Ellis suggests refers to a more restricted group of workers in Pauline literature, especially the plural form (Prophecy and Hermeneutic 13-22; also “Coworkers” [1993] 183-85).² But the same designation, particularly in Philippians, is applied to all who share the common faith (Phil. 1:12, 14; 3:1, 13, 17; 4:1, 8, 21). Epaphroditus is also the apostle’s “fellow worker,” a description used frequently in Paul’s writings in reference to his own coworkers (Rom. 16:3, 9, 21; 2 Cor. 1:24; 8:23; Phil. 2:25; 4:3; Col. 4:11; 1 Thess. 3:2; Philem. 1, 24), as well as to God’s (1 Cor. 3:9; cf. 2 Cor. 6:1). Epaphroditus is also Paul’s “fellow soldier,” a term employed only twice in the NT, here and with reference to Archippus in Philem. 2. On Paul’s use of military metaphors, cf. also 2 Cor. 10:3-6; Eph. 6:10-17; 2 Tim. 2:1-4. These descriptions would apply either to their joint efforts in Rome (cf. 1:13-14) or perhaps to the time Paul had spent in Philippi (Acts 16:40; 20:1-3).  

Connection to Philippi

     Epaphroditus is then called “your messenger,” translated from the noun apóstolos (transliterated “apostle”), a term applied generically to anyone who is sent [vb. apostéllō = to “send out or away”] as a delegate or a messenger (cf. Acts 14:4, 14; 2 Cor. 8:23; 1 Thess. 2:6). He is also described as a “minister” [leitourgós], viz. one who renders spiritual service (cf. Rom. 13:6; 15:16; Phil. 2:25; Heb. 1:7; 8:2) “to my need.” Epaphroditus had delivered financial aid to Paul from the Philippi church (v. 30; 4:18) and may have assisted the apostle in other areas of ministry.

     Paul says Epaphroditus “has been longing [epipothōn] for you all,” using the present active participle conveying a persistent, ongoing desire (cf. Rom. 1:11; 1 Thess. 3:6; 2 Tim. 2:4). Further, he “has been distressed” [adēmonōn], the present active [persistent, ongoing] participial form of adēmonéō, elsewhere descriptive of the agony Jesus experienced in Gethsemane (Matt. 26:27; Mark 14:33). The reason for this heavy emotional strain is “because you heard that he was ill … near death” (cf. v. 30). Epaphroditus was apparently more concerned about their worries than his own health.

     Paul credits the merciful God for Epaphroditus’ recovery, which has provided much relief (“lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow”). It is of interest to note that even though at times Paul manifested the miraculous ability to heal (Acts 14:9-10; 19:11-12; 28:8), he appears to have been unable to heal Epaphroditus despite deep concern (cf. 2 Tim. 4:20). Evidently the “signs of an apostle” (2 Cor. 12:12) were not intended for personal use but to confirm God’s word in the presence of unbelievers (cf. Mark 16:20; Heb. 2:3-4). The sending back of Epaphroditus serves a threefold purpose: (a) to boost the morale of Epaphroditus (v. 26), (b) to boost the morale of the Philippi congregation (v. 28b), and (c) to relieve Paul’s sorrow (v. 28c).

     The commendation comes to a climax with the words, “So receive him in the Lord with all joy, and honor such men.” This may indicate Paul’s underlying suspicion about the brethren’s less-than-favorable attitude toward their messenger: “Why has he been gone so long?!” or “Why is he returning instead of continuing his ministry?!”³ Although most translations position the phrase “in the Lord” as a modifier of “receive,” I-J. Loh and E. A. Nida suggest that it is better connected to the phrase “with all joy,” i.e., “welcome him the way Christians should welcome fellow believers” (Translators Handbook 84).   

     The “honor” Epaphroditus deserves is due to the fact that “he nearly died for the work of Christ, risking his life …” In ministering to Paul in Rome, which is approximately 700-1,200 miles (1,127-1,931 km) from Philippi (depending on the route taken), he courageously exposed himself to danger, and his illness may have been due to “over-exertion” (J. B. Lightfoot, Philippians 125).
Further Thoughts

     In this chapter Paul has emphasized unity and its necessary prerequisite – humility. Epaphroditus is an exemplary role model for his brethren. In fact, he is listed among other great examples, like Jesus Christ (vv. 5-11), the apostle Paul (vv. 12-18), and Timothy (vv. 19-24).

     Later on in the letter Paul writes, “I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent, a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God” (Phil. 4:18).

     The clause “I have received full payment, and more. I am well supplied” is lit., “but I have [in full] all things and abound; I am full.” The verb apéchō, according to J. J. Müller, “is a word generally used in connection with a receipt or settlement of payment. The obligation has been honored, the debt has been settled …” (Philippians 150 n. 8). T. L. Constable calls this Paul’s “written receipt for their donation, as well as a ‘thank-you note’” (Notes 85).    

     Epaphroditus, as the official messenger of the Philippi church (2:25-30), has delivered to Paul “the gifts” – the ESV translation of the plural article tá, lit. “the [things]” – inclusive of the monetary “gift” (v. 17) and perhaps other items. Generally the Roman government did not provide for their prisoners beyond basic needs, so help from family and friends was necessary.

     Paul considers the generosity of his brethren “a fragrant offering, a sacrifice acceptable and pleasing to God.” The imagery here is drawn from the OT sacrificial system descriptive of what was pleasing to God.⁴ Under the new covenant, what pleases him are the consequences of his Son’s sacrifice and the offerings we give and the spiritual sacrifices we make (Eph. 5:2; Rom. 12:1; Heb. 13:15-16).

Conclusion

     Epaphroditus is mentioned by name only twice in the biblical record, and nowhere outside the Philippian correspondence. While there is no record of any sermon he may have preached or souls he may have led to Christ, he played a crucial role in the Lord’s church. He was a faithful brother, a loyal worker, a brave soldier, a dependable messenger, and a humble servant. We welcome Paul’s directive to “honor such men.”

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The name Epaphras (Col. 1:7; 4:12; Philem. 23) is an abbreviated version of the same name but probably not worn by the same person.

     ² Cf. 1 Cor. 1:1; 2 Cor 2:15; Rom. 16:23; 1 Thess. 3:2; 2 Cor. 8:18 f., 23; 9:3, 5; 11:9; 12:18; 1 Cor. 16:10 ff.; also 1 Cor. 16:19 f.; Eph. 6:23; Phil. 1:14; 4:21 f.; Col. 4:15; Gal. 1:2.

     ³ H. C. G. Moule suggests, “Epaphroditus was perhaps a little undervalued at Philippi, in proportion to St Paul’s estimate of him” (Philippians 164).

     ⁴ Gen. 8:21; Ex. 29:18, 25; Lev. 1:9, 13, 17; 2:2; Ezek. 20:41; cp. Lev. 26:31.

Related Posts: Timothy (Part 2), Aristarchus

Image credit: http://pastorerickson.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/1421675734877.jpeg 

Baptism is a Work!

     A major debate in some religious circles is whether or not baptism is an essential step in the salvation process. One of the arguments against the necessity of baptism is the claim that it is a “work,” and since we are not justified by works, baptism has no part in our justification. But this argument is misleading. The Bible describes a number of different kinds of works, so to lump them all together in the same category is to distort the biblical facts.

     Is baptism a work of the devil (1 John 3:8)? Is baptism a work of the flesh (Gal. 5:19-21)? Is baptism a work of the Jewish Law (Rom. 3:27; Gal. 2:16)? Is baptism a work of human merit (Eph. 2:9) or ingenuity (Acts 7:41)? Is baptism a good work (2 Tim. 3:17), or a work of faith (1 Thess. 1:3) or of God (John 6:28)?

     Seeing that baptism is a divine directive (Matt. 28:19; Acts 10:33, 48), it is not something humans have devised in an attempt to save themselves. In fact, the penitent believer who obeys the command of baptism is not working at all but is passive while someone else does the baptizing. This is not to say, however, that baptism is not a work. The question is, what kind of work? Is it a work of man, or a work of God? Paul writes in Colossians 2:12, “buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead” (NKJV, emp. added).

     Baptism is a work of God. When one is baptized “for the forgiveness of sins” (Acts 2:38), it is God who does the forgiving. When a believer is baptized and is saved (Mark 16:16), God is the one who does the saving. In baptism I do not save myself. To teach otherwise is to discount the necessity of believing in Jesus, since this also is a work of God (John 6:28-29). Claiming that one is justified by faith alone without baptism or any other obedient action is contrary to the word of God: “You see then that a man is justified by works and not by faith only” (Jas. 2:24).

     Why argue with the Bible? Just do what it says.

--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts:

Related articles: Josh Ketchum's Is Baptism Unnecessary?

Image credit: https://fthmb.tqn.com/Roc2kE81-On-YbVu5odoxSvPxK0=/2124x1413/filters:fill(auto,1)/Baptism-GettyImages-77866343-568d534c3df78ccc155f1e89.jpg