When speaking of the end, Latter-day Saints often use a phrase that is worded in a somewhat unusual way: we speak of knowing the beginning from the end. (See, e.g., Elder Neal A. Maxwell, All These Things Shall Give Thee Experience 38.) This not a scriptural phrase. The closest scriptural phrase is “knowing the end from the beginning” (cf. Isaiah 46:10 and Abraham 2:8). Nevertheless, its meaning is significant. It says more than we may notice. There are various ways of understanding that phrase, but one is that we know the beginning by means of or because we know the end: the end defines and gives meaning to what comes before it.

If we remember that in numerous places in scripture the Lord identifies himself as both the beginning and the end (e.g., Revelation 21:6), we can understand the phrase to imply that we understand who Christ is as Creator by understanding him as the Being who will be revealed at the Second Coming. On that understanding, the book of Revelation is important to us because, as the first verse of the book says, it is a “Revelation of Jesus Christ,” meaning not only a revelation that he gave, but a revelation in which he is revealed.

In that case, rather than a manual for discerning the events of the last days, Revelation is a book that intends to help us understand who Jesus Christ is by showing him as the End. Like the Gospels, Revelation is a testimony of Jesus Christ, but this testimony is given from an understanding of Christ as the End rather than from understanding his mortal ministry. (And it correlates with an understanding of who he is from the beginning, as Creator. See, e.g., Richard D. Draper and Donald W. Parry, “Seven Promises to Those Who Overcome: Aspects of Genesis 2-3 in the Seven Letters,” in The Temple through Time and Eternity 121-142. ) As you read Revelation, ask yourself how it reveals Christ.

Chapter 5

Verse 1: What does Doctrine and Covenants 77:6 tell us about the book that John sees? What does “the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God” (D&C 77:6) mean? To what kinds of things does that phrase refer?

The Doctrine and Covenants goes on to say that the book contains “the hidden things of his economy concerning the earth during the seven thousand years of its existence.” What does the word “economy” mean in this context? The original meaning of the word was “the management of a household.” Is that relevant to understanding what the D&C verse means?

What does D&C 77:8 tell us about the seven seals on the book?

Verses 2-4: Why does one have to be worthy to loose the seals? Why would the fact that no one was worthy to do so make John weep? Why is it important for that book to be opened?

Verse 5: Why is Christ described here as the Lion of Judah and the root of David? Why is he the only one who can open the book and reveal its contents? What teaching do we see in this verse?

Verses 9-10: Why does Christ’s redemptive sacrifice make him worthy to open the seals?

What is the significance of saying that the redeemed come “out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation” (verse 9)?

What does it mean to be kings and priests and, by implication, queens and priestesses to God? What priesthood does this verse refer to? How does the claim that they have been made kings and priests relate to the promise of Exodus 19:5-6?

Before looking at chapter 6, consider this chart from the Sunday School Manual. It correlates the seven seals with the seven periods of a thousand years (D&C 77:7). (These thousand year periods are not the same as the dispensations of the Gospel.)

Notice that Revelation takes only eleven verses to cover the first five seals, fourteen verses to cover the sixth, 226 to cover the seventh, and thirty-three to cover the events after the seventh. What is the significance of that emphasis?

Chapter 19:1-10

Verses 1-4: Who is singing this hymn of praise? What are they celebrating?

The word “alleluia” is a transliteration of a Hebrew phrase meaning, “Praise Yahweh.” How is that significant?

Who is the great whore? (Compare 2 Nephi 10:16. Is that verse using the same image?) Why is the image of whoredom and fornication used to represent those people?

Verses 5-9: Who is singing this hymn of praise? What are they celebrating?

Compare verse 7 to Matthew 5:12 and Luke 6:23. What promise do we see being fulfilled here? How is that promise relevant to us today?

Why is the Second Coming described as a marriage feast? (Compare Isaiah 25:6 and Matthew 8:11.) Why is marriage often used as a symbol of our relation to Christ? Who are the bride and groom in this wedding? How do the clothes of the bride compare to the clothing of the whore (verse 8)?

Compare Revelation 17:4, 18:16; see also Matthew 22:11-13 and Revelation 7:14. Who are called to the wedding feast (verse 9)?

Chapter 21

Verses 1-4: What period of time is John describing here? (Compare Revelation 20:11.) How is knowing what will happen then relevant to us now?

What did the sea represent in the Old Testament? What does the absence of the sea represent?

Verses 7-8: How are these verses related to the two hymns that we saw in chapter 19?

Verses 22-27: Why is there no temple in the New Jerusalem (verse 22)? What does that tell us about earthly temples?

On this earth, Christ is the great secret. Why will he not be a secret in the New Jerusalem? Why aren’t the gates ever shut (verse 24)?

Chapter 22

Verses 1-2: Where else in scripture have we seen the tree of life growing beside a river? Is that the same image that we see here or a different one? If they are different, how? If you think they are the same, what makes you think so?

Verses 3-5: What does it mean to say that nothing in the heavenly city will be cursed (or “accursed”—verse 3)?

What is the significance of being able to see God’s face (verse 4)?

What does it mean to say that the saints will have the Lord’s name written on their foreheads? (See also Revelation 3:12, 7:2-3, and 14:1.) Is there a connection between this prophecy and the commandment in Exodus 13:1-10 and 11-6; and Deuteronomy 6:4-9 and 11:13-21? Does this have anything to do with us today?

Verse 5 tells us of the absence of darkness in the celestial kingdom. This has literal as well as symbolic meaning. Can you explain each?

Verses 6-7: To what does “these sayings” (verse 6) refer, to the book as a whole or to the latest part of the revelation?

To which servants has God revealed these things?

Why does the Lord say “these things must shortly be done” (verse 6) and “I come quickly” (verse 7)? In our terms, his Second Coming has not come quickly after his First.

Please comment on this post at Feast upon the Word.

Background

The article on Revelation in the LDS Bible Dictionary is excellent. You should read it before you read the lesson material. In addition, here are some things that may be helpful:

So far in our New Testament study this year we have seen three kinds of writings in the New Testament: the gospels, which bear testimony of Christ and his life; letters to congregations of early Saints preaching the Gospel, often in the context of dealing with problems in those congregations; and doctrinal expositions (Romans and Hebrews). Revelation is unlike any of those. Apocalyptic revelations like the book of Revelation were not uncommon in the early Church. Several others are still extant. But Revelation was the only one of them canonized.

We know that we do not have a record of everything taught either in Jesus’ Palestinian or in his American ministry. For example, we don’t have a record of his teachings during the forty days after his resurrection and the Book of Mormon tells us explicitly that it doesn’t include everything he said (3 Nephi 19:32; 26:6, 16; 28:13-14). In the New Testament, Jesus says that he holds some teachings back from those outside his inner circle (Mark 4:10-11), and the early Christian Church knows of this practice. In addition to the many documents that were simply lost because of the problems of preserving writing before the invention of the printing press—probably a majority of them—early Christians believed that some things were held back, kept secret and not committed to writing.

For example, Clement of Alexandria (late 2^nd century A.D.) says that he knows teachings that Jesus revealed to his disciples but that were handed down orally rather than in writing (Miscellanies 5.10; 6.7). In the early third century, Origen, also of Alexandria (early 3^rd century), argues that the prophets and apostles knew more than could be written down (Against Celsus 6.6). He says that Jesus knew divine secrets “and made them known to a few” (Against Celsus 3.37). Origen seems at least to have in mind Paul’s claim in 1 Corinthians 2:7: “we speak the wisdom of God in a secret, even the hidden wisdom that God decreed for our glory before the world” (translation revised).

This reservation of some things from wide distribution was not unique to the Savior’s time or to his disciples immediately after him. 1 Nephi 14:25 shows us one example of the Lord forbidding that the prophet write some things, and Ezekiel 3:1-3, where the prophet is given a roll (scroll) to eat and then told to speak, may be meant to indicate that some things can be taught orally but not written down.

Ignatius of Antioch (also of the 2^nd century) wrote that the Father had entrusted only Jesus with the Holy of Holies and with the secrets of God (To the Philadelphians 9). By writing of the secrets of God at the same time he writes of the Holy of Holies, Ignatius suggests that the secret teachings had to do with the temple, which seems also to have been the tradition among early Christians. For example, the early church historian, Eusebius (2^nd half of the 3^rd century, first half of the 4^th), says that both James the brother of Christ and John the apostle were high priests (History 2.23, 3.31), and Eusebius clearly understands the high priest as a person officiating in the temple. Revelation, therefore, seems to be, like Ezekiel, at least partly a revelation about the temple. Thus, as you read it, you may understand it better if you watch for temple symbolism. Keep in mind, however, that the temple used for the symbols was the temple in Jerusalem rather than a modern temple. Of course the two are related, but the structure and the rituals conducted in each were different from one another.

Perhaps the most important symbol of that early temple was the entry of the high priest into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement. The Holy of Holies represented the divine world, and presumably the court outside the Holy of Holies represented this world. Part of the difficulty we have reading Revelation may twofold: (1) it assumes that its readers are part of an audience which knows that there are secret—“private” might be better—teachings and that this book is like many other books that deal with those teachings; (2) it makes its points using symbolism from the Jerusalem Temple and we are not familiar with that symbolism. Understanding Revelation requires understanding the Jerusalem Temple better.

Revelation was written at a time when the early Church was suffering persecution and when it expected the Second Coming soon. In fact, early Christians often spoke of the Second Coming as “The Revelation,” using the same Greek word used as the name of this book: apokalypsis, from which we get our word “apocalypse” and meaning “the revelation of something hidden or secret.” Christ’s Second Coming would reveal something that the world did not know, a secret, namely that Jesus, whom the world crucified, is Creator, King, and Judge. The book of Revelation tells us that in it we can find “hidden secrets,” things not known by those outside the Church and, perhaps, not by all of those within the Church.

However, the “secrets” of Revelation are not matters of arcane symbolism or things that require special knowledge or education, any more than the “secret” of the Second Coming is. Many non-believers have heard of the Second Coming, but it remains a mystery or secret to them anyway because they do not believe it or understand it. So it is important not to think that we cannot understand the book of Revelation without special knowledge or training. Remember, an angel told Nephi that the things John wrote are “plain and pure, and most precious and easy to the understanding of all men” (1 Nephi 14:23)—though it may also be important to remember that the angel was speaking to someone who said something similar of Isaiah (2 Nephi 25:4).

Speaking of the symbols in Revelation, Joseph Smith said:

Even though we know by revelation what some of the figures or symbols in the book of Revelation mean, that knowledge is generally useless, but given to us so that we won’t contend over them. It appears that the better approach to Revelation would be not to worry about those symbols, to learn what it teaches without concern for them.

It may help you keep track of what you are reading if you notice that Revelation is arranged in seven groups of seven, with an introduction and a conclusion. (I have used the arrangement by J. M. Ford, The Anchor Bible Commentary on Revelation [1975], though the idea that Revelation is arranged in seven groups of seven, with an introduction and a summary, is not original with her and though I have felt free to change her outline somewhat.)

This framework may help you read Revelation, by helping you see how its parts relate to one another. But it is only a framework. Additional elements are placed on it, for example, 1:9-3:22, where we have a vision of the resurrected Christ. And almost anyone trying to outline the book is likely to outline it at least somewhat differently.

Notice also that this outline doesn’t take account of Joseph Smith’s inspired rewriting of parts, especially of chapter 12. Those inspired changes make quite a difference in places. Thus, this outline has its limitations, but it may be helpful in spite of them.

There is considerable scholarly disagreement about the dates for this book. Because I accept the belief that the apostle John is its author, I assume that he wrote Revelation in 95-96 while on the isle of Patmos, a very small island off of what is now the Turkish coast. Tradition says that he was banished there by the Roman governor. If so, he may have been the only prisoner on the island because, though we have records of banishments to other islands in the area, there are no records of banishments to Patmos. It also is possible that he went to Patmos for refuge rather than because he was officially banished.

Study Questions (I have used study notes produced by Arthur Bassett as the foundation for my questions.)

Chapter 1:1-8 (Use the JST in the Appendix of your LDS Bible)

Verses 1-2: Why was the revelation given? Why is it important for us to know that? The word “of” in the phrase “of Jesus Christ” can be read in several ways: “about,” “from,” and “belonging to.” Which do you think most likely? Can it mean all three?

One tradition is that the substance of this revelation was first given to Christ in the wilderness and then subsequently repeated, with changes, to John. True or not, why do you think readers of this book would think that?

What do “things which must shortly come to pass” (verse 1) and “the time of the coming of the Lord draweth nigh” (verse 3) tell us about when the early Christians expected the Second Coming?

Verse 3: Why is the book, Revelation, as important in our day as it was in John’s? Why is it fitting that it ended up as the last book in the Bible, although it probably was written before the Gospel of John?

Verses 4-5: What addition does Joseph Smith make to in verse 4? What does he change in identifying the faithful witness? Why is that important?

Verse 6: In what sense can we become kings and priests—and queens and priestesses—to God through his atonement? Why is it important for us to realize this? What does it mean to be a king or queen and priest or priestess to God?

Verses 7-8: What does the prophet add about the Savior’s entourage at his Second Coming? In what way is Jesus the beginning and the end in the history of this world? (Alpha and Omega are the first and last letters of the Greek alphabet, the language in which the New Testament was originally written.)

Chapter 1:9-20

Verses 9-10: What does John tell us about the occasion for Revelation? Why is it instructive that the revelation came on Sunday? Does this have any meaning for our own Sabbath worship?

Verses 11: All of these churches (except Thyatira) are located on one of the Bible maps in the LDS edition. Ephesus is the only city we have discussed earlier in the New Testament (although Laodicea is mentioned in Paul’s letter to the Colossians). Might their location signify anything in particular? In other words, why these churches rather than others?

Verses 2-16: It is interesting to compare John’s description of the Savior with Joseph Smith’s description in D&C 110:1-4. How are they alike? How different? What do the seven golden candlesticks and the seven stars signify? (See verse 20, and footnote 20b.) Why might the Lord appear in this manner? What is added to the account by the use of symbolism? Where is Christ in relationship to the seven candlesticks? What does this tell us? How is he still in the midst of his church today?

Verse 17: Considering what we understand of John’s previous acquaintance with the Lord, what is interesting about John’s reaction to his appearance? How do you explain his reaction?

Chapters 2-3

As you read through these condemnations and promises held out for the future of these churches, ask, first, how early Saints might have understood what they meant. Then aks yourself how each relates to us today.

2:1-7 (to Ephesus): What does the Lord praise in Ephesus (verses 2, 3, and 6)? The Nicolaitans may have been a group of Gnostics. They seem to have approved of eating meat offered to idols—in direct contradiction to the decree of the Jerusalem Council—and perhaps even to have believed that immorality was not sinful because what one does with one’s body doesn’t matter. What might they appeal to in Christian belief or practice to try to justify these beliefs and practices?

For what does Christ chastize the Ephesians? (“First love” may refer to their feelings for each other, or for the Savior.)

What is interesting about the reference to the tree of life? Is this the same tree of life mentioned in Genesis 2-3? Does this add more light to the Lord’s instructions in Genesis 3:22-24? What insight does the Book of Mormon (1 Nephi 11:21-22) add to our understanding of the term?

2:8-11 (to Smyrna): What does the Lord foretell for the saints in this city? Tradition has it that the Jews of Smyrna were aggressive in their persecution of the Christians. Why would the Lord say they were not Jews? (How does Paul define a Jew [Romans 2:28-29]?)

The crown is one made from laurel leaves for the winners of athletic contests. How is this an appropriate symbol?

In what way were these saints poverty-stricken? In what way were they rich?

What promise is given to them for their own futures?

What is meant by the second death (Alma 12:16, 32; Helaman 14:18)? Who participates in the second death?

2:12-17 (to Pergamos): Pergamos or Pergamum was the ancient capital of Asia, built on a cone-shaped hill rising 1,000 feet above the surrounding valley. Its name in Greek means “citadel.” The Lord speaks of Satan ruling from there probably because it was the center of emperor worship in Asia. One of the most outstanding constructions of the ancient world, the altar of Zeus, was there, and may be what verse 13 calls “Satan’s seat” (verse 13) because of its shape.

What heresy had arisen in this city?

What was the original purpose of manna in the Old Testament? What is probably meant then by hidden (sacred) manna?

In context, what is meant by the white stone and the new name (D&C 130:4-11)?

2:18: (to Thyatira): Founded initially as a military outpost, Thyatira was noted for its many trade guilds. It is reputed to have been the original home of Lydia, the woman who traded in purple cloth, who joined the church in Philippi, and housed Paul and his companions in her home.

What problem had crept into the church in Thyatira? (“Jezebel” is probably a nick-name referring to a prominent woman in the congregation, who was leading them astray, as Queen Jezebel did Israel during the days of Elijah. Note the JST in ftn. 22a.)

What is the promise given to those who overcome (JST Rev. 2:26-27).

The reference to the “morning star” is a reference to Christ (2 Peter 1:19; Revelation 22:16.) Why would he be called the “morning star”—a term used today for the planet Venus that appears in the east, early in the morning?

3:1-6 (to Sardis): Sardis was a city of great wealth and fame, the capital of ancient Lydia. Twice before in its history it had been conquered because of its lack of watchfulness. How does John use their past history to warn them of their future?

What does it mean to think one lives, and yet is dead? Are we guilty of this?

What promise is given to those in Sardis? Why should we care what promise they receive?

3:7-13 (to Philadelphia): What does Jesus mean by the “key of David?” What does he open that no man can shut, or shut that no man can open? (This appears to be a reference to Isaiah 22:21-15.) What is signified by the name written upon the Christians? How do we take upon ourselves the name of Christ? This is the first reference in Revelation to the “new Jerusalem.” In this context what is meant by this term? What does it mean to be a pillar in the temple?

3:14-22 (to the Laodiceans): Laodicea was one of the wealthiest cities in the Roman empire, known for its banking establishments, medical school, and textile industry. All of these are reflected in Christ’s rebuke (verses 17-18).

Why would Christ be called the great Amen?

The lukewarm water may refer to a water system that originated in hot springs in Hierapolis, a distance from the city, which, by the time it arrived in Laodicea was tepid, and of little use for medicinal purposes. Why is it so difficult to work with one who is lukewarm (apathetic)? How do we often manifest apathy our religious life? How is rebuking and chastening a sign of love?

JST Revelation 12

The Prophet Joseph revamped the entire twelfth chapter of Revelation, even changing the sequence of verses. Use his translation in the appendix. Much of the symbolism in this chapter is unclear, but we can sort enough to make some intelligent conjectures.

Verses 1-5: Who is the woman depicted in verse 1? (See verse 7.)

What does the number 12 refer to in the Old Testament? In the New?

What is the child that the woman brings into existence with great travail (verse 7)? Who is the man child? What is the travail involved in bringing forth the man child?

What is the rod of iron? Is it the same as in 1 Nephi 15:23-24? If you think the answer is yes, why?

When was the man child caught up to God and his throne? How does this give us a time frame for what follows?

Who is represented by the red dragon? Why do you answer as you do?

Verses 6-11: This introduces a reference to the pre-mortal existence and the defeat of Lucifer in the war in heaven. Who is Michael?

The word “Satan” in Hebrew means “the accuser.” We usually think of Satan as our tempter. How is he our accuser? How does understanding him as our accuser change the way we see our relation to God?

How is Satan to be overcome eventually (verse 11)? Why are both aspects—the atonement and our testimony of the atonement—needed for his defeat?

Verses 12-17: Look at these verses in general terms rather than at their specifics. What does the future hold for God’s people? at John’s time? in our own?

Please respond to these notes at Feast upon the Word.

There is also dispute as to whether all four documents (Gospel of John and 1-3 John) were written by the same person. Though few doubt that 2 and 3 John have the same author, there is more disagreement about the authorship of the other two. For these study materials, however, I will not worry about that concern. I will refer to John as the author of all three of these letters as well as the Gospel of John.

We don’t know a great deal about the particular group of Gnostics with whom John is concerned (there were a variety of kinds of Gnosticism), but based on the content of the epistles, this group seems to have denied that Jesus’ life in the flesh was essential to his role as Christ, and they seem to have believed that moral behavior is irrelevant to salvation (which does not necessarily mean they condoned immoral behavior, though they may have). Paul confronts a similar though even more serious false belief several places in Romans, e.g., 3:8, 3:31, and 6:1. They also seem to have thought themselves better than others because they are Christians, and they may have even thought themselves better than other Christians (which would explain John’s constant reiteration that they should love their brethren).

At the same time, there appear to have been Christians, probably those converted from Judaism, who had difficulty with the idea that Jesus was divine. John’s overall intent in the letters seems to be combating these two potential heresies by explaining Christ.

It is important to remember that these letters were written when apostasy was a very real threat, something happening before their eyes. Like Paul, Peter, and Jude, John could see the difficulty of keeping the new church on course. In these letters we see him giving what counsel he can.

Given the context in which these letters were written, how might they be particularly applicable to us today? How does their original context give them added meaning for us?

My notes will concentrate on 1 John 4:7-5:4.

In the previous chapters John has emphasized two signs of a good relation with God: faith in Christ and love of the members of the Church. Here he shows how those two signs are related to each other.

A note on agap?: George Stecker and Harold Attridge (The Johannine Letters: A Commentary on 1, 2, and 3 John, pages 143-46) say that the Greek word here translated “love,” namely agap?, doesn’t get its Christian meaning from its meaning on the Greek of the time. Instead, it is the word chosen to translate the Hebrew word ’hb and gets its Christian meaning from the meaning of that Hebrew word: “[I]n the LXX agapan is universally applied to the actions of God and human beings and . . . no field of divine or human affection is excluded. Thus sexual love is described by the word agapan (Hos 3:1*; 4:18*; Jer 2:25*; Ezek 16:37*), but so is the love of friends in a nonsexual sense.” The 2^nd century BC Greek translation of the Old Testament uses the word to describe the entire gamut of kinds of love, and the New Testament uses it in the same way.

Verses 7-8: John says that all who love are born of God and know him (verse 7). (In this context, “know” means “to know about, to make acquaintance”—Bauer, Danker, Arndt, & Gingrich, Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament.) What does John mean? How is he using the word “born”?

How can what John says be true? In what sense is someone outside the Church who loves (e.g., Mother Teresa) born of God? In what sense does a person like that have an intimate acquaintance with him?

John has described those reading the letter as “little children” (e.g., 1 John 2:1), as the offspring of God. What does this verse say about those who do not love?

What does it mean to say “God is love”? How does this understanding of God differ from the understanding of the Old Testament, where he was the One who had chosen Israel, the One in covenant with Israel? (See, for example, Deuteronomy 7:8.) How is it the same or different from the idea of God as Israel’s spouse, as in Hosea, Jeremiah, and Isaiah?

Perhaps it is even more relevant to ask: what does it mean to say “He that loveth not, knoweth not God”? Why would it be true that if we don’t love, then we aren’t acquainted with God, not in relation with him? Does this ever describe us? When? How?

Verses 9-10: To what does “this” refer in the first part of verse 9?

When John tells how God’s love was manifest toward us so that we might live through his Son, do those first person plural pronouns refer to humanity in general or to those who have come to Christ? How do you know?

What is the point of verse 10? Can you explain verse 10 in your own words?

Verse 11: Given the topic that John is addressing, is it significant that he begins this verse with “beloved,” a word used six times in 1 John?

What we find in this verse is also a common theme in Paul’s letters (see, for example, 1 Corinthians 8:12), and we saw it in 2 Peter 1: God’s love for us obligates us to love one another. Some have argued that this means that when we don’t love another, we deny the atonement (since we implicitly say that Christ made a mistake in dying for that person). What do you think of that argument? Is it too extreme? Is it wrong? Is it right? In what sense or senses?

Verse 12: The JST amends the first sentence of this verse. (See the footnote in the LDS edition.) Even with the emendation, however, it is odd. Since Jesus is God, John cannot mean what this verse says literally. In fact, in verse 14 he testifies that he has seen God in Jesus. So what do you make of what John says here?

Why is this claim part of John’s discussion of love? Is it possible to see God and not be loving? Why or why not? If we are loving do we necessarily see God? Where or in what do we see God? What does seeing God have to do with our obligation to love one another?

What does it mean to have God’s love dwelling in us? What does it mean to have his love perfected (or “completed”) in us?

Verse 13: What is the connection between having the Holy Ghost and loving one another? Does this verse explain why John said, “No man has seen God at any time, except them that believe”?

Verses 14-16: Why does John insert his personal testimony here? What has it to do with his discussion of our obligation to love? What does it mean to confess that Jesus is the Son of God (verse 15)? What does it mean to dwell in love (verse 16)? What does it mean for God to dwell in a person (verses 15 and 16)? What does it mean for a person to dwell in God?

Verses 17-19: Does the word “herein” (i.e., “in this”) refer to what came before verse 17 or to what follows in it?

Remember the connection between perfection and completion or wholeness as we read this verse. (In the scriptures “perfection” rarely means “without flaw.” Instead, it means something like “ripe” or “whole.”) In what is our love made perfect? How does the perfection of our love make us bold (confident)?

What does John mean when he says “as he is, so are we in this world”?

Why does perfect love cast out fear (verse 18)? This seems to imply that when we fear we do not love. If that is true, then when we lack confidence (when we fear we cannot do something or we fear to make a mistake), it is because we do not love sufficiently. Does that make sense? Is it true? (Compare Doctrine and Covenants 121:45.)

John says that fear carries with it punishment (verse 18; see the footnote to “torment” in the LDS edition). What does that mean?

Verse 19 is probably intended as a contrast to the last sentence of verse 18: “One who is afraid has not yet been perfected in love. But we love him because he first loved us.” What is the connection here? What is John’s point?

Verses 20-21: Why does John think this warning against self-deception is necessary? It is doubtful that someone would make the kind of blatant statement that we see in these verses. John is exaggerating so we will clearly see his point. How, then, do we say that we love God while, at the same time, we hate our brother? When and in what ways does that happen?

Textual Note: Verses 8-9 of I John 5 contain what is called the “Johannine comma.” (Besides referring to the punctuation mark, the word “comma” refers to a short phrase or word group.) The Johannine comma appears to be an insertion from a much later time. (The earliest manuscript containing the comma is from about 700 A.D.) Thus, most scholars believe that the verses should read as follows, omitting the part that is struck out:

⁷ For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. ⁸ And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

To respond to this post, please go to Feast upon the Word.

]]> http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2011/11/new-testament-sunday-school-lesson-44-1-3-john/feed/ 0 http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2011/11/new-testament-sunday-school-lesson-43-1-2-peter-jude/ http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2011/11/new-testament-sunday-school-lesson-43-1-2-peter-jude/#comments Sat, 05 Nov 2011 22:17:51 +0000 Jim F. http://timesandseasons.org/?p=17682

2 Peter

Jude

If Jude is the brother of James, who the tradition assumes to be the author of the book of James, and James is, as tradition also says, the brother of the Lord, then Jude is also the brother of the Lord. Why doesn’t he say so when he introduces himself?

Jude is parallel to 2 Peter 2 and most scholars, though certainly not all, believe that Jude was the inspiration for 2 Peter 2. Here are the parallels between them:

1. Greeting and explanation for why the epistle was written (1-3)
2. Warning against deceivers/seducers (4-16)
   1. Seducers pervert God’s grace, turning it into lasciviousness (i.e., unbridled lust, debauchery) (4)
   2. Reminders of what has happened to others who did so: Egypt, and Sodom and Gomorrah (5-7)
   3. The seducers speak evil of the authorities and of things they do not understand (8-10)
   4. The examples of others who rebel against God: Cain, Balaam, and Korah (11-13)
   5. Enoch’s prophecy of the Second Coming (14-16)
3. Remaining steadfast (17-25)
   1. Remain steadfast against mockers (presumably those who mock Christians because the Second Coming has not occurred (17-19)
   2. Remain steadfast by relying on the Holy Ghost in prayer, by remaining in God’s love, and by hoping for eternal life (20-21)
   3. Show mercy toward doubters (22-23)—The Greek text here is unreliable; this is the meaning that seems most likely.
   4. Concluding praise of God (24-25)

These study notes will concentrate on 2 Peter 1:2-11

Verse 2: Peter asks a blessing on those to whom he is writing, namely that through their knowledge of the Savior they might have grace and peace multiplied. What does that mean?

What is grace? What kind of peace might he mean? How are they multiplied?

Verse 3: Verse 2 asked that grace and peace be multiplied; this verse continues, saying “just as his divine power has granted us all things for life and godliness, through a knowledge of the one who has called us to glory and to excellence. The word translated “godliness” refers to the practical aspects of religion—doing good works—more than it does to specifically devotional acts or acts of worship.

“Excellence” is another accurate translation of the word translated “virtue.” It includes not only chastity, but all other moral excellence as well.

How does a knowledge of Christ provide us with all things for life and godliness? How does he provide us with that knowledge through his divine power? What does it mean to say that he has called us to glory? To excellence?

Verse 4: The word “whereby” refers back to something which came before. What? In other words, this verse says that priceless and magnificent promises have come to us by means of something mentioned in the previous verse. What is that?

Through these promises we can become “partakers of the divine nature.” What does that mean? In other words, what is the divine nature, and what does it mean to partake of (to take part in) it? Don’t we already partake in that nature by virtue of being the spirit children of our Heavenly Father?

What does this verse say is the cause of corruption in this world? (As used here, “lust” does not refer only to corrupt sexual desires; it refers to misdirected desire in general.) Why does Peter speak of “escaping” the corruption of the world rather than just “leaving” it behind?

Verse 5: Instead of “and beside,” I think the beginning of this verse should be translated, “for this purpose.” What is going to be brought about by the things which follow?

“Add to” is a reasonable translation, but it doesn’t catch the connotations of the Greek word it translates. That word carries with it the notion of providing for something lavishly. (In one Greek manuscript, for example, a man uses this verb to complain that his wife has left him even though he provided more than he could afford.) The idea is that abundance is required. What does that suggest about the meaning of this verse?

What is the first thing one must have to become godly?

The word translated “knowledge,” can also be translated “understanding,” “having insight,” “circumspection,” “discretion,” “discernment.” Why would we need to add understanding, insight or discernment in addition to virtue and faith? Here’s an alternate translation of the beginning of the verse:

For this purpose, exert all diligence so that by your faith you may make possible virtue (provide for virtue), and by your virtue, knowledge.

On this reading, we cannot be virtuous without faith. Is that right? By the same token, we cannot have knowledge without virtue. Is that right? If those are both right, how can they be? Read this way, each of the things mentioned in the list is something that makes possible what follows it in the list. Go through the list asking yourself how the first in each pair makes the second possible.

Verse 6: Notice the explanations of “temperance” and “godliness” in the LDS edition. (The word used for “godliness” here is the same as that used in verse 3.) How do those add to the meaning of the verse?

Another translation of “patience” would be “perseverance.” How does understanding or discernment make self-control possible? How does self-control make perseverance or enduring to the end possible? How does perseverance make good works (godliness) possible?

Verse 7: How are these three, godliness, brotherly kindness, and charity, related to one another?

Verse 8: What does it mean for these things to abound in us? Notice that if we wish to have a knowledge of Christ, we must have these things: “If these things are present and abound among you, they will make you neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Why does Peter use barrenness and unfruitfulness to portray not having a knowledge of Christ? What does it mean not to be barren and to be fruitful in knowing Christ?

The word translated “knowledge” connotes an intimate knowledge. What does it mean to have an intimate knowledge of Christ?

Verse 9: If we have these things, we know Christ intimately, but if we lack these things, we are so nearsighted that we are blind. Why does Peter use nearsightedness to portray those who have forgotten their baptismal covenants and blessings?

Verse 10: What is a calling? Who has been called? How? Do the scriptures use the word “calling” in different senses? If so, what are they and which is being used here? How is the word “calling” related to its ordinary meaning, “to call out”? Does that help us understand better what it means to have a calling?

What does “election” mean? Who are the elect?

The verb translated “to make sure” can also be translated “to confirm”: “Instead, therefore, brethren, be diligent to confirm your calling and election.” The implication is that we have already been called and elected, but that we must confirm that calling and election, we must make it sure for it to be valid. When were we called and elected? How do we confirm that calling and election? How does the last part of the verse make more clear what it means to have one’s calling and election made sure?

Verse 11: The word order here is quite close to the Greek word order (as it often is in the King James Version), but that makes it more difficult to read. Put in a more natural English word order, this says, “For so [i.e. “in this way”] an entrance into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ will be ministered unto you [i.e. “provided for you”] abundantly.” What point is Peter making with that sentence? To see some of the implications of these verses about making our callings and elections sure, compare verse 5 through 7 with verse 6 of D&C 4:

What has D&C 4 to do with having one’s calling and election made sure?

Please respond to this post at Feast upon the Word. ]]> http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2011/11/new-testament-sunday-school-lesson-43-1-2-peter-jude/feed/ 0 http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2011/11/nt-sunday-school-lesson-42-james/ http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2011/11/nt-sunday-school-lesson-42-james/#comments Sat, 05 Nov 2011 21:41:04 +0000 Jim F. http://timesandseasons.org/?p=17677 We do not know who the author of this epistle was (there are several persons named James in the New Testament), but tradition says that it was James, the brother of Christ and the presiding elder in Jerusalem after Christ’s death. (See, for example, Acts 15:13, where he presides over the Jerusalem conference called to deal with the Gentiles joining the early Church.)

What do we know about Jesus’ family’s relation to him prior to the crucifixion? (See, for example, John 7:1-5.) When do you think James became a follower of Christ? Is 1 Corinthians 15:7 relevant? Does that verse suggest any reason that James might be more sympathetic to Paul than we sometimes assume?

Chapter 1

Verses 2-4: The word translated “temptations” also has the meaning “trials.” (The Greek word can mean either, but “trials” seems to fit the context better here.)

How can we count our trials as “complete joy”?

In verse 3, the word translated “patience” could also be translated “endurance.” How does the testing of our faith bring about endurance?

Verse four tells us that we should “let endurance [patience] take its complete [perfect] effect [work].” What does that mean?

James explains that endurance will make us “perfect,” and he gives two synonyms for “perfect”: “entire” (or “whole”) and “lacking nothing.” This is the usual meaning of “perfect” in the New Testament—not “without flaw” or “able to do anything” (two common modern interpretations of perfection). For example, James uses the same word here for perfection that is used in Matthew 5:48, and neither of them mean “perfect, in other words flawless.” How might this understanding of perfection make us more comfortable with the possibility of being perfect in this life, even if we are not flawless in this life? Can a person be whole or without lack and, at the same time, not be flawless?

Verses 5-7: What is the connection of verse 5 to those the precede it?

Notice the footnote that gives another translation for “upbraideth.” It can also be translated “ungrudgingly.” The Father gives to us generously (“liberally”) and ungrudgingly (“upbraideth not”). Is James creating an implicit contrast between the Father’s answers to prayers and our responses to those who are in need?

In verse 6, notice the footnote in the LDS edition: “wavering” means “doubting.” Why can’t the doubter expect to receive anything from the Lord (verse 7)?

Verse 8: Is this verse the conclusion of the topic discussed in verses 5-7 or the beginning of a new topic? In either case, can you explain how it fits with the verses around it?

Why does James describe doubting as being “double-minded”? Can you think of examples of what it means to be double-minded? What makes the double-minded person unstable? Is Christ saying much the same as this verse when he says that we cannot serve two masters (Matthew 6.24, Luke 16.13, and 3 Nephi 13.24)?

Verses 12-15: As in verse 2, “temptation” in verse 12 means “trial” or “test” more than it does “temptation.” Those who become approved and who love the Lord will receive a crown of glory. What does it mean to become approved? How do we do that?

In verse 13, why does James warn us against saying that the Father is testing us? That seems to be a common way of speaking—what’s wrong with it? Is he warning against a particular kind of testing? Is may be helpful to know that there is only one word in Greek for both “test” and “tempt”? Which meaning do you think James intends in verse 13?

In verse 14 how does he explain our trials of faith? If this is an accurate way of describing our trials—if they are the result of our own lusts—what is Satan’s role in tempting / trying us?

Note that “drawn away” translates a verb used to describe how a hunter lures wild game out into the open, and that “enticed” translates a verb used to describe baiting fish or bird traps. Therefore, we might loosely translate this: “Every person is tempted when he is lured out by means of his own lusts and a trap for him is baited with them.”

The word translated “lust” includes what we would describe as lust as well as any other inordinate desire, so this is not just a description of how we are tempted and tried regarding sexual things (though those thing are certainly included). See Romans 7:19-23 for a similar, but more complicated description of this same point: we are tried by our own inordinate desires.

In verse 15 James uses the metaphor of procreation: we have lusts that conceive and give birth to sins; in turn, they conceive and give birth to death. (Here Paul’s discussion in Romans 5:14-21 and 6:3-11 is relevant.) Why do you think he uses that metaphor?

Verses 21-24: “Naughtiness” (verse 21) is too weak a translation for modern English readers; “evil” would be better. See the note on “engrafted” in the LDS edition.

James says that because God gives us every good thing (verse 17) we should put aside all sin and receive the gospel in humility. Why is humility necessary to receiving the gospel? Can we receive the gospel without putting aside all sin? Why or why not? How does James’s understanding of our reasons for repentance and obedience compare to Paul’s?

Compare what James says here about receiving the engrafted word to what Alma says in Alma 32.

In what kinds of ways do we deceive ourselves about our works (verse 22)? Why is this kind of self-deception like looking in a mirror (verses 23-24)? What is the point of James’s metaphor?

Verse 25: In verses 23 and 24, James described looking at oneself in a mirror. Notice the contrast he creates here: rather than to ourselves in a mirror, we should look to the “perfect law of liberty.” How does the previous metaphor of the mirror help him make his point here?

What is the perfect law of liberty? Why is it a law of liberty? Is 2 Nephi 2:27 relevant? How does the phrase “perfect law of liberty” contrast with the Pharisaic understanding of the law? In our own lives, do we think of the law as a law of liberty, or do we think of it as something more like the Pharisaic law?

Verses 26-27: We commonly use the second of these verses as a proof text (i.e., a text to support something we are teaching, such as in a Sacrament talk), but notice that it is intended as a contrast with verse 26: verse 26 describes those who think they are religious; verse 27 describes those who really are. What does verse 27 mean in context? Does it fit our use of it as a proof text?

Why would having an unbridled tongue be a particularly apt description of the person who believes himself to be religious but isn’t? What does his tongue say that it ought not to say?

Why is the care of orphans and widows a particularly apt description of the truly religious?

What does it mean to be “unspotted from the world”? (Compare the JST.)

We might think of verse 27 as the thesis statement of James’s letter. As you read the letter as a whole, ask how each part is related to that thesis. How, for example, is James 1:5 relevant to the fact that genuine faith issues in works? How are verses 2 and 3, which remind us that we must be patient in trial and persecution, relevant to that fact?

Chapter 2

Verses 1-4: In James’s day, a gold ring was not only a sign of wealth, it was also a sign of authority. How does the kind of discrimination that he describes in these verses mean that we are “judges of evil thoughts”?

Verses 5-7: How do these verses apply to us? Who are the poor that we despise today? James says that the saints give precedence and honor to the rich even though the rich oppress them. Do we do anything that is comparable?

Verses 8-9: What two ways of living is James contrasting here?

Verse 10: What does this mean? Why isn’t this a message of despair—what can give us hope in the face of such a message?

Verses 14-20: Is what James says here in conflict with what Paul taught, namely that we are saved by faith rather than works? (Compare Romans 3:28 and 4:4-5.) If not, why not? How can these two things be reconciled?

What does verse 19 suggest about doctrinal disputes between us or between us and non-Latter-day Saints? Why does James include what he says in verse 19 as part of talking about why works are necessary?

Chapter 3

Verse 1: The Greek word translated “masters” in the King James version would be translated “teachers” in contemporary English. Why is James counseling those to whom he writes that not many should be teachers?

What does he mean that those who teach “shall receive the greater condemnation” or judgment? Presumably this is the judgment the teacher will receive if he or she fails. Whose judgment does he have in mind here, that of God or that of those who are taught?

What is the significance of the fact that James says “we shall receive the greater condemnation”?

Verse 2: Here is another translation of the first sentence: “We all stumble in many ways.” Again, James uses a second person plural verb rather than a second or third person verb. Why?

What is the one sin that everyone shares? Is James talking here about only teachers or about truly everyone?

Verses 3-7: What is the point of these analogies? When James refers to the “whole body” (verse 3) and the ship (verse 4), is he referring to the individual person or to the Church as a whole?

In verse 5, the word translated “matter” might be better translated “wood”: “How great a pile of wood a little fire kindleth!” Some (such as the New American Standard Bible) translate this as “See how great a forest is set aflame by such a small fire!”

Verses 8-9: If it is impossible to tame the tongue, what is the point of James’s advice?

Verses 10-12: What is it that ought not to be (verse 10)?

Verse 13: The word “conversation” is misleading, though it looks like it continues the previous discussion of what the tongue can do. In fact, the Greek word means “behavior,” which is what the word “conversation” meant at the time of the King James translation.

What does it mean to have wisdom and knowledge (i.e., understanding)?

Are these verses written to the Church as a whole or are they directed at teachers? If they are directed at teachers and chapter 2 was directed at teachers, what might we conclude about the intended audience for James 3:1-12?

Verses 14-15: How does the wisdom that James describes here contrast with the wisdom and knowledge he referred to in verse 13? Can you give an example of this kind of wisdom?

The Greek word translated “strife” in verse 14 is an unusual word. It most commonly means “a self-seeking pursuit of political office by unfair means” (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Greek Literature). What might it mean in this context?

What advice does James give to those who have jealousy and selfish ambition (“bitter envying and strife”) in their hearts?

What does it mean to say that one kind of wisdom comes from the earth?

Verses 16-18: James summarizes what he has been saying. How can wisdom be pure? How does his admonition here relate to what he earlier said about pure religion?

How can wisdom be peaceable? Gentle? Easy to be intreated? Full of mercy? How can it have good fruits? How can it be without partiality or hypocrisy?

Chapter 4

Is James taking up a completely new theme at this point in the letter, or is there some connection between his previous discussion of the relation of faith and works and the discussion of teaching that we find here?

Verses 1-5: According to James what explains the “wars” that occur among the members of the Church—among the members of a family? If that is the cause of strife among us, what will be its cure?

How does James say we try to get what we want (verse 2)? What way does he say we should go about getting those things? (“You kill, and desire to have” could also be translated “you kill and are fanatics.”)

How are these verses related to James 1:27?

Suppose we say, “I’ve tried that way of getting what I want and it didn’t work.” What is James’s reply (verse 3)? How does he explain the failure of our prayers? Why does he use adultery as a symbol for all evil desire (verse 4)? (The Old Testament equation of adultery with idolatry may be to the point here.) What is friendship with the world? It isn’t clear what scripture James is quoting in verse 5; perhaps it is one we no longer have.

Verses 6-8: In this verse he quotes from the Greek version of Proverbs 3:34.

What does it mean to say that the Father gives grace to the humble?

Is there a difference between submitting to God and resisting the devil, or are these two ways of saying the same thing (verse 7)? How do we submit to the Father?

How do we draw nigh to God (verse 8)?

What does it mean to cleanse our hands? How do we do it?

What does it mean to purify our hearts? How do we do that? What is the difference between cleansing our hands and purifying our hearts?

Notice that this verse gives us a solution to the problem of doubting (cf. James 1:6-8): cleanliness of hand and purity of heart. How do they overcome our doubts?

Is “cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded” a case of parallelism, where “cleans your hands” is another way of saying “purify your hearts” and “double minded” is another way of saying “sinners”? If so, what do those parallels teach us?

Verses 9-10: Why is James advising them to mourn (verse 9)? It doesn’t make any sense for this to be a general admonition, since the gospel brings peace and happiness. What are the particular circumstances in which he might admonish them to mourn?

What does it mean to be humble in the sight of the Lord (verse 10)? How does that differ from being humble otherwise? What is genuine humility? What does it mean to be lifted up?

A Comparison of James and the Sermon on the Mount (with thanks to Art Bassett)

Please respond to this post at Feast upon the Word.

1 Timothy 3

3:15-16: How is the Church “the pillar and ground of truth”? What metaphor is Paul using? How does that metaphor help us understand what the Church does?

What does he mean when he speaks of “the house of God”? Does he mean the church as a whole or individual congregations?

What does Paul mean when he says “without controversy”?

To what is Paul referring with the word mystery? Why is the word mystery an appropriate reference for that case? (Verse 16 seems to be another quotation from a hymn.) What is Paul talking about when he says that Christ was seen by angels?

1 Timothy 4

4:1-3: Paul has just finished speaking of the qualifications of bishops and of deacons. How is that topic related to the one that he takes up now, apostasy?

When did Paul and Timothy think the “latter times” would be (verse 1)?

What does it mean to give heed to seducing spirits or doctrines of devils? Can you think of specific examples of doing so? Why is it tempting to do so? Do we ever do so?

The practice of the time was to brand criminals and fugitive slaves. How is that practice related to what Paul says in verse 2?

In verse 3, the Greek word translated meat means “food.” (The word meat was a general term for food in King James English.) How do you square Paul’s teaching here with the Word of Wisdom?

Compare these verses to passages such as Matthew 24:10-12, Acts 20:29-30, 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12, 1 John 2:18 and 4:1-3, and 2 John 7. Why is apostasy an important New Testament theme? Why does that theme matter to us today?

4:12-16: The word “conversation” (verse 12) meant something quite different at the time of the King James translation than it means today. It meant “how a person lives with others.” Does that change your understanding of the verse?

It appears that at this time few could read silently. The ability to do so was considered to be an amazing gift. Does that suggest anything by what Paul might mean by “reading” (verse 13)? To whom would Timothy be expected to read? What would he be expected to read?

What does “exhortation” mean?

The word “doctrine” has a much more verbal sense in Greek than it has in English; it means “teaching” rather than “belief.” (Does that change your understanding of 1 Timothy 4:1 or 2 Timothy 4:3?)

What is Paul telling Timothy he must do for the congregation at Ephesus? (Paul had ordained Timothy bishop of Ephesus.)

How does doing that set an example?

What gift is Paul speaking of (verse 14)? What does Paul mean when he says that Timothy received that gift by prophecy?

What might the laying on of hands signify? In other words, is there anything about the act of laying on hands that helps us understand what we do in the ordinances that require it?

The basic meaning of the word translated meditate in verse 15 is “care for.” What things is Timothy to meditate on or care for?

What would it mean to give himself wholly to them?

Why is it important that others see Timothy profiting (progressing)? Does this conflict with Paul’s advice in Colossians 3:22 (and other places) that we not do what we do in order to please others?

How would Timothy take heed unto (i.e., watch) himself? How would he watch the doctrine or teaching?

What is Paul telling him to continue (to persevere in)? How will persevering in watching his life and the teaching save both himself and those who hear him?

2 Timothy

2:23-26: What does Paul mean by “unlearned questions” (verse 23)? Can you give examples of “foolish and unlearned questions” that we take up today?

What is wrong with dealing with questions that start quarrels?

Notice that the word strifes in verse 23 and the word strive in verse 24 are variations of the same root, both in English and in Paul’s Greek. Does that say anything about Pau’s meaning?

What does it mean to say that the Lord’s servant must be gentle to everyone? How do we preach gently? How can we rebuke gently or exhort gently?

Verse 25 will make more sense if you put “to him” after the phrase “oppose themselves.”

What do the last part of verse 25 and verse 26 say is the point of preaching and exhortation?

Paul seems to be using “repentance” and “recover themselves” as parallel terms. In what way is repentance a recovery of self?

Why does Satan take us captive? How does he do so?

How does the gentleness that Paul recommends to Timothy differ from Satan’s method? How do the results of the two methods differ?

3:1: Why will the last days, as Timothy understands them, be perilous (difficult, fierce—verse 1)? Perilous might be better translated “difficult” or “grievous.”

3:2-5: Here is another translation (that of the New International Version) of the list in verses 2-5, compared to the King James translation:

lovers of their own selves = lovers of self

covetous = lovers of money,

boasters = boastful

proud = proud

blasphemers = abusive

disobedient to parents = disobedient to their parents

unthankful = ungrateful

unholy = unholy

without natural affection = without love

trucebreakers = unforgiving

false accusers = slanderous

incontinent = without self-control

fierce = brutal

despisers of those that are good = not lovers of the good

traitors = treacherous

heady = rash

highminded = conceited

lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God = lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God

Which elements of this list differ significantly from the King James translation? What do you make of those differences? Does this list help you understand the King James translation?

Are there any things in this translation with which you disagree?

Look at each item in the list and ask yourself why Paul condemns it. Do we condemn all of these things today? If we do not condemn some, why not?

3:2: In the last days, men will love themselves and money (in this verse the word covetous refers directly to the love of money), they will be braggarts (boasters) and arrogant (proud), they will rail (blaspheme), they will disobey their parents and be ungrateful, they will be unholy.

Part of the purpose of this long list of sins (from here through verse 7) seems to be to overwhelm us, to give us a feeling for the last days as much as to give us a detailed list. On the other hand, the list is informative. Can you think of an example of each of these sins from these, the last days? It may be more instructive if we think of ways in which we might find these sins in ourselves, our homes, or our neighborhoods rather than thinking of ways in which these describe other people with whom we have nothing to do, such as the reports we find in the news.

3:3: “Without natural affection” seems to refer back to their disobedience to parents and their ingratitude: those in the end times will not have the kind of family relations one would expect.

Instead of “truce breakers,” this should read “implacable,” meaning “intractable,” “uncompromising,” “unyielding.” An implacable person refuses to overcome the problems between he and another.

A better translation of “false accusers” might be “slanderers.”

Rather than incontinent, I think this should be translated “without self-control.” In these kinds of contexts, the word incontinent has almost exclusively a sexual meaning, but the Greek word here refers to a general lack of self-discipline, including but not limited to sexual self-discipline. They will be both lacking in self-discipline and fierce or savage.

As if summing up everything he has said so far, Paul says these people will despise that which is good—a contrast to 1 Thessalonians 5:21, where Paul has told us to hold fast to that which is good.

3:4: These people will be betrayers (traitors) and reckless (heady), puffed up (highminded) people who love pleasure more than they love God.

There are lots of obvious examples of loving pleasure more than loving God; television shows them to us constantly. But can you think of examples even closer to home, examples we are more likely to succumb to?

3:5: The Greek word for deny here means more than just a mental denial; it includes carrying out the denial.

What does it mean to have the form of godliness? What does it mean to deny the power of godliness? Remember that this is a verse referred to by the Savior in his visit with Joseph Smith in the Sacred Grove (JSH 1:19). What does it mean there? What might this warned us of in our own lives?

3:6: These are the kind of people, he says, who “insinuate themselves into houses” (in order to destroy those houses). It isn’t that they “creep” in unknown to the occupants of the house, but that they ingratiate themselves with those who live in the house in order to seduce the women of the house. The women are said to be idle (silly), one who is overwhelmed (burdened) with sin and led about (led away) already by all sorts of lusts. It isn’t just any woman who will fall for the tricks of such a person, but one who is idle, one who is not doing what needs to be done and who is already at least mentally involved in the very things to which she now succumbs. Presumably what is said here applies to men as well as to women.

In what ways are we led about by all sorts of lusts? (Remember, that in the scriptures lust refers to more than just sexual desire. It refers to any inordinate desire.) James 1:14 is probably relevant here, for it describes how we are tempted by our lusts.

3:7: The word Greek word translated learning can mean “finding out.” These idlers burdened down by sin are “always finding out,” in other words, they are always attracted to some new thing, constantly curious—but they are never filled. That is one of the ways that they are burdened with sin and led about by all sorts of lust, namely they lust after knowing new facts and tidbits, new gossip, new experiences, new titillations, new horrors.

It seems to me that much of our culture’s concern for the news of the day, for Hollywood and other celebrity gossip, for slasher and sex movies is a matter of “ever learning.”

The word knowledge here means “full knowledge.” Idlers never come to a filling and complete knowledge which the truth provides, a knowledge that would not leave them always looking for some new thing.

The roots of the Greek word for truth means “revelation.”

3:8: Taking up the seducers again, Paul compares them to the magicians who contested with Moses (Exodus 7:10-12 and 22): they are of corrupt mind and they have not been true to the faith required of them.

3:9: “They proceed no further” means “they won’t advance any further.” There will be a limit to the success of these false teachers: they may be able to lead away people like the women he has described, but they will not be able to do any more than that. Eventually, they will be found out, just like the magicians were found out when Aaron’s rod ate theirs.

3:12: Paul says that all who strive to live the kind of godly life required of those who follow Christ will suffer persecution. What does this say about us and our day? In what ways are we persecuted?

3:13: The evil will get worse and worse, but Paul implies that seducers and idlers will affect primarily each other: deceiving each other and being deceived by each other.

3:14: In contrast, he asks Timothy–and be extension any who read this letter–to continue in what he has learned and has been given assurances (testimony) of, since he knows where he learned them. To whom is Paul referring here–who taught Timothy and gave him assurance of the truth of the teachings?

3:15: One of the places from which Timothy has learned and received assurance are the scriptures. The scriptures can make one wise. (For the reference Paul seems to intend here, see Psalms 19:7) What does it mean to be wise? With regard to what do the scriptures make us wise? Is imparting that wisdom to us the purpose of scripture?

For a scriptures which show a number of different uses of that word, see Genesis 3.6; Exodus 31.3 and 35.31; Deuteronomy 1.13 and 34.9; 2 Samuel 14.20; 1 Kings 3.28 and 4.29; 2 Chronicles 1.10; Job 5.13; Psalms 2.10, 37.30, 90.12, and 111.10; Proverbs 1.5, 2.6, 3.19, 4.7, 8.1, 9.1, 11.12, 14.8, 15.2, 28.7, and 29.3; Ecclesiastes 1.18, 2.26, and 8.1; Isaiah 11.2; Daniel 1.4 and 2.21; Matthew 10.16 and 11.25; Mark 6.2; Luke 2.52; Romans 12.16; 1 Corinthians 1.17, 21, and 30, 3.19 and 4.10; Colossians 4.5; James 1.5, and 3.13 and 17; 2 Nephi 1.8, 9.28, and 28.30; Mosiah 2.17; Alma 26.35 and 39.2; Helaman 15.16; Mormon 9.28; Doctrine and Covenants 6.7, 28.5, 58.26, 72.17, 88.40 and 118, 89.19, and 122.2; and Abraham 3.21.

3:16: All scriptures are inspired. Literally, this means that all come as God’s breathings, i.e. as his word. Unlike secular writings, it is as if our Father in Heaven is so close when we read the scriptures that we can hear him breathing throughout them. Why doesn’t this imply the inerrancy of scripture?

What is the significance of Joseph Smith’s change in verse 16?

All scripture is useful for teaching (“for doctrine”), for convincing (i.e. giving testimony–“reproof”), and for instruction in how to be righteous. How can we use the scriptures for these things? How can we get to know them so we can use them for these things?

3:17: Look at footnote 17a. What does that tell us about how to understand verse 17? In what sense does scripture make us perfect? If you change “furnished” to “equipped” and “unto” to “for,” the verse will probably be easier to understand. How does scripture equip us for all good works?

4:1-2: Why does Paul begin this part of his instruction to Timothy with a solemn charge?

Why does he use this particular description of Christ, “the judge of the quick and the dead and the Second Coming”?

If you read verse 2 as the King James translation has it—“be instant [prepared] in season, [and] out of season”—what does this verse say?

If you read it as Joseph Smith changed it, what does it say? (See footnote 2b.)

What does reprove mean? What does rebuke mean? Are they different? What does exhort mean?

4:3-4: What does it mean to say that some “will not endure sound doctrine”?

What does “heap to themselves teachers” mean?

How do their itching ears explain the fact that they have heaped teachers to themselves? What does it mean to say that they heap these teachers to themselves “after their own lusts”?

Does this passage describe any in our own day? Does it ever describe us? If so, how so?

Overall: What should our response be to what we read in these passages from 1 and 2 Timothy?

Please comment at Feast upon the Word.

There is even more to cover than usual in this lesson. The result is 12 pages of study material.

Because it usually helps to understand the context in which the verses one studies occur, I will supply some background information about each book, as well as an outline of the text of each. Then I will follow those with a few study questions.

Remember as you read these materials that they are to help you study the letters assigned for the lesson. They are not suggestions for teaching the lesson. Of course a person could use these to help her prepare her lesson, but that would mean judiciously picking and choosing what would help her do so.

If you are reading these to prepare a lesson, may I suggest that you consider using Philemon and Philippians 2:5-15 as the verses for your lesson’s focus?

Philippians

(2) All work should be done as if it were being done for the Lord rather than other people. This is because, having taken on us the name of Christ, we are his (our earthly master is not really our master), and we should acknowledge that in everything we do. (3:23-24).

(3) Anyone who does wrong, no matter what his or her position in life, will be repaid for that wrong (3:24).

(4) Masters must treat their servants (i.e., their slaves) justly (4:1).

ix. Pray always, and especially pray for Paul’s mission (4:2-4).

x. We must conduct ourselves wisely in regard to those outside the Church, making the most of every opportunity to preach the gospel (4:5).

xi. Speak graciously and with good taste, and respond to every person as is proper (4:6).

f. Concluding remarks (including, it seems, a reference to the epistle to the Ephesians in verse 16). (4:7-18).

3. Study Questions

Paul has urged Philemon to accept Onesimus’s new status as a Christian. We don’t know whether he did, but what kinds of things might bear on how Philemon responded to Paul’s request?

Are we still related to one another as masters and slaves, as those with authority and those without? (This is a social question at least as much as a church question: who do we recognize as having authority? Why do they have it? Should they have the authority we recognize in them?)

In Christian terms, the question is “Do we accept the new status of brothers and sisters that the gospel gives us? Or do we bring in the authority of the world and allow it to operate within the sphere of the Church?

Paul’s call for Philemon to free Onesimus, if applied to us, is a call for us to free any over whom we exercise unrighteous authority. (And D&C 121 tells us that almost all of us do that!) What examples might there be of such unrighteous authority in what we do? How do we free those over whom we exercise unrighteous authority?

Jesus tells us that we must be “the servant of all” (Mark 9:35, 10:44: D&C 50:26). Suppose that is not a metaphor? How is being the master of some different than being the servant of all? How do we accomplish that?

Please comment on this post at Feast upon the Word

As with Hebrews, for me the best response is that answering those questions doesn’t matter, though I assume that Ephesians was written by Paul. The book is from early Christianity (approximately 62 AD at the latest, if written by Paul). It was either written by Paul or someone reasonably familiar with his teaching.

We might think of Ephesians 4:1-3 as the thesis of this book: “₁ I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, ₂ With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; ₃ endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” As you read the assignment, keep that thesis in mind to help you see how the various parts fit together as a whole.

For these study questions I will focus on the context of the verses suggested for the Sunday School lesson.

Ephesians 2:11-22

Verse 13: Why is it important that Gentile converts remember that they are “made nigh by the blood of Christ”? Nigh to what or whom?

Another translation of verse 14′s “middle wall of partition” is “the dividing wall of hostility” (New International Version). Why had there been a wall of hostility between Jews and others? Is there anything like that wall of hostility in the contemporary Church? Within our own cities and country? Between our country and others?

Verses 14-18: How did Christ break down the wall of hostility of Paul’s time? How does he do it for us? Specifically, how did his sacrifice of himself make peace between us possible (verses 15-16)?

Verses 19-22: In what sense had some early Christians been “strangers and foreigners”? In relation to what / whom? What does it mean to be “a fellow citizen with the saints”? Of what are they citizens?

Why does Paul compare the church to a household?

Is there a discrepancy between verse 20, which says that the apostles and prophets are the foundation of God’s house and 1 Corinthians 3:11, which says that the only foundation is Jesus Christ?

Ephesians 4:7-16

Verse 7 is the beginning of the section in which we find the scripture we often quote and on which this lesson focuses, Ephesians 4:11-14. It speaks of the grace given each of us “according to the measure of the gift of Christ.” What does verse 7 say?

One translator understands the verse this way: “The gift of the Messiah is the measure after which grace was given to each one of us” (Markus Barth, Ephesians, page 425).  Does that help or hinder your understanding of the King James translation? Can you say any better what Barth’s translation means than you can what the King James translation means?

One commentator (Ralph Martin, Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, page 49) uses the heading “Christ’s Gift and his Gifts” to describe these verses. Can you understand why he would do so? Does using his description help you see the verses differently? Do you think that a different description would be more accurate?

What is the gift that Christ has given us that Paul is referring to here? Himself? The Holy Ghost? Something else?

How are apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers a gift?

How does the teaching of verse 11 fit with the teaching of verse 7, that grace is apportioned to us with Christ’s gift as a measure? In other words, in what sense are these offices in the Church a gift measured by Christ’s gift?

Compare 1 Corinthians 12:18 to see that this gift is more than an occasional blessing to some persons. Christ has given a structure to the church, a structure that includes these offices.

Except for prophets, all of the words used in verse 11 to describe officers in the Church are taken from secular titles rather than from Old Testament religious titles. Why do you think that was done?

The Greek word for “evangelist” means, literally, “one who preaches the good news.” Latter-day Saints understand it to refer to those who are ordained patriarchs because Joseph Smith taught “an Evangelist is a Patriarch” (Teachings, page 151). Why do you think that “evangelist” was used as the name for the office of the patriarch in the early Church?

In verse 12, the word translated “perfecting” means “equipping,” “training,” or “discipline.” Put those words into the verse and see whether using them changes the meaning for you. Which word do you think would be the best translation?

The word translated “ministry” in verse 12 is diakonia, the word from which we get the word “deacon.” The Greek word means “service” or “ministry.” It indicates almost any kind of service. Why do you think the word was adopted as the name of a priesthood office? After all, all priesthood offices are opportunities for service and ministry.

Why do you think that Paul uses the metaphor of Christ’s body to refer to the Church (verse 12)?

Verse 13 sets out the goal of the Church: unity in faith and knowledge of the Son of God.

Is the “perfect man” of which Paul speaks here supposed to be understood as the perfect individual who is a member of the Church (compare Colossians 1:28), or is “man” a metaphor for the Church itself? Or is the perfect man whom Paul has in mind Christ?

To think about the answer to this question, think about its grammar in the King James translation: the subject of the sentence is “we all.” The verb is “come.” “Unto” introduces a prepositional phrase that is the object of the verb. How do those translators seem to have understood what Paul was saying?

What does the last phrase of verse 13, “unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ,” mean?

Verse 14 tells us why Christ has given us the gift of a church hierarchy: the goal is the maturity described in verse 13, and that maturity will deliver us from the instability described in this verse.

Why does Paul imply that the instability against which we must guard isn’t merely the consequence of our human frailty, but behind it we find “the trickery of men who are experts in deceitful scheming” (Markus translation)?

Comment on this post at Feast upon the Word.

As you read this story of Paul, notice that the Church of his time has spread to many communities. Paul is able to move from place to place, at least in the general area of Palestine and parts of Asia Minor (now western Turkey), and to depend on local branches of the Church as he does so. For example, in verses 3-7 we see him visit the branches at Tyre, Ptolemais, and Caesarea. Clearly the early Church grew rapidly after the Day of Pentecost, roughly thirty years before the story we are reading. (Paul’s journey was in approximately 58-61 AD).

Though King Agrippa, son of Herod Agrippa and king of the Roman province of Palestine, had found no crime with which Paul had been charged (Acts 26:32), he could have bee released immediately. But because Paul had demanded a hearing before Caesar—to which he had a legal right as a Roman citizen—Agrippa had to keep Paul as a prisoner and send him to Rome as a prisoner. He was held in prison in Jerusalem for two years before the Romans got around to putting him on a cargo ship with cargo bound for Rome. Because he demanded a hearing, Paul was treated as a prisoner for the time between his arrest and his appearance in Rome. No bail in ancient Rome! In the end, Paul preached in Rome because of his decision—and he was executed by the Romans because of it.

Chapter 21

Acts 21:10-12: Why do the saints in Caesarea try to stop Paul from going to Jerusalem? Why would the Lord give the kind of prophecy that he gives through Agabus (verses 10-11) if, as appears to be the case, he wants Paul to go to Jerusalem? Is it relevant that the prophecy is given publicly, to more than just Paul?

Acts 21:20-25: When Paul reports to the elders in Jerusalem how his missionary work has gone among the Gentiles, how do they respond? What do you make of verses 19-20: Paul reports on the work among the Gentiles, they praise God, then they say “Look how many Jews have joined the Church and remained faithful to the Law of Moses”?

Why is there no mention of the collection that Paul has been taking up from Christians elsewhere for the Christians in Jerusalem (Romans 15:25-27, 31; 1 Corinthians 16:1-4; 2 Corinthians 8:1-7; Galatians 2:10)? This has also been an important part of his work, but it goes unmentioned.

What problem do the elders point out to Paul? Is there anything like that in the contemporary Church?

What are they asking Paul to do in verses 23-24? The four men in verse 24 are surely men who have taken a Nazarite vow (see the LDS Bible Dictionary) and wish to complete it. Why do the elders in Jerusalem want Paul to do what they ask him to do?

Why are they making these requirements of Gentile converts (Acts 21:25)? Are these requirements part of what is expected of Christians and, so, also expected today, or are they something that the Jerusalem leaders put in place in order to create harmony among the two factions of early Christianity? Are there any things today that we are asked to do, not because, ultimately, they are religious requirements, but because they promote harmony among us?  Why is harmony so important to the early Christian Church and to the latter-day Church? Are there drawbacks to requiring harmony? I assume that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, but do they?

Verses 27-36: Jesus prophesied that his followers would be persecuted and even killed (Luke 21:12-17), and Paul clearly knew those possibilities were real before he experienced them. After all, he had persecuted Christians in his former life and seen them killed for their beliefs. But we are very seldom killed for our beliefs. If such a murder were to happen, it would probably be committed by someone insane. And the persecution we suffer is so mild by comparison to the persecutions of the ancient Church or the early latter-day Church as not to count. Does Jesus’ saying, therefore, apply to people before us but not to us? If it applies to us, how does it?

Verse 28: Of what is Paul accused? Are we ever accused in this way? Do we ever accuse others, perhaps fellow Latter-day Saints, in this way? How do we avoid such accusation?

Note:

Gentiles or foreigners (allogeneis) were not permitted beyond the Court of the Gentiles. Lest foreigners ritually defile the sacred precincts, the inner courts were marked off by a stone balustrade with slabs inscribed in Greek and Latin warning foreigners of the death penalty for trespassing (see Josephus, J.W. 5.5.2 §§193–94; Ant. 15.11.5 §417; Philo, Legatio ad Gaium 31 §212 [“death without appeal”]). This regulation was an interpretation of Num 1:51; 3:10, 38; 18:7. The text of the Greek inscription was “No one of another nation may enter within the fence and enclosure round the Temple. Whoever is caught shall have himself to blame that his death ensues.” Two copies of such an inscription have been discovered. (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, The Acts of the Apostles: A New Translation With Introduction and Commentary, 698 [Yale UP, 2008])

Verse 34: Note that the word castle would be better translated “fort” or “military headquarters,” though the King James decision to translate the word as castle is quite understandable. This is the Fortress Antonia in ancient Jerusalem.

Chapter 22

Verses 3: Why does Paul begin his defense by telling about his birth and education? How are those relevant to the charges that the crowd has made in Acts 21:28? What do you make of the fact that Paul says “I am a Jew” rather than “I was a Jew?”

Verses 3-21: Stephen defended himself by recounting the history of Israel (Acts 7:2-50). Paul defends himself by recounting his own history. Why does each defend himself as he does?

In verse 3 Paul describes himself as a zealot for God, and he says that those calling for his arrest are also zealots for God. But for what are they zealots? Other translations for zealot are “enthusiast,” “adherent,” and “loyalist.” How do you understand what Paul is saying about himself?

How does Paul’s account of his conversion(verses 6-21) differ from his earlier account (Acts 9:1-19)? For example, in Acts 9:7, he says that those with him heard a voice, but didn’t see anything. Now he says that they saw the light, but heard nothing. Can you pick out other differences? Why does Paul tell the story differently? Does that make his story more or less credible? Explain.

Verse 17: Note that Paul’s return to Jerusalem seems to have been three years after he went to Damascus. See Galatians 1:18. Why do you think he stayed in Damascus that long? How do you think the Sanhedrin reacted to the fact that their emissary to Damascus had, from their point of view, vanished? Or do you think they heard about what had happened to Paul? How do you think they would have reacted to that? Which scenario seems most likely to you? Why?

Verse 20: Notice that the Greek word translated martyr here is the same word translated witness in verse 15. What does that tell you?

Verse 22: Why does what Paul says in verse 2 send the crowd into such a fury? What kinds of things today are likely to send members of the Church into an unrighteous fury? How do we avoid that?

Verse 24: Note: “examination by scourging,” in other words torture, was a common practice in the Roman world. Witnesses were tortured to get them to give the evidence needed to make a decision about their case. However, by Roman law citizens could not be examined by torture.

Verse 30: Why does the captain call the chief priests and the Sanhedrin to the fortress to hear Paul?

Chapter 23

Verse 3: Why is “whited wall” an insult?

Verse 6: Why does Paul say “I am a Pharisee” (my italics)? Doesn’t what he preaches about the Law of Moses mean that he is no longer a Pharisee?

Is it true that Paul is being condemned because he believes in the resurrection?

Verse 8: How could the Saducees (the temple priests) be faithful Jews and deny the resurrection from the dead? (Be careful about the assumptions you make as you answer this question. You may need to do some research.)

Verse 9: The Pharisees say, “We find no evil in this man,” in other words “We find nothing wrong with this man, we have no charge to bring against him.” Given our usual understanding of the Pharisees, what is ironic about this?

Verse 11: How do you think Paul responded to the message of this visitation?

To comment on these notes, go to Feast upon the Word.

Most contemporary scholars, including some LDS scholars, do not believe that Paul wrote this book. It is last among the letters of Paul because those compiling the New Testament (in the early 3^rd century AD) were not sure that Paul had written it. There are a variety of reasons for these doubts, but the most significant is that the language of Hebrews is quite different from that of the rest of Paul’s letters. (However, the content and occasion of the letter are also different, and that might account for the difference in language.) Notice also that, though the title traditionally given to this book is “Letter to the Hebrews,” it doesn’t have the form of a letter. Some who do not believe that Paul wrote Hebrews believe it may have been written by Apollos, one of Paul’s followers.

In the end, however, it doesn’t matter whether Paul, Apollos, or someone else wrote Hebrews. The message of Hebrews is Pauline, even if Paul didn’t write it. Christians have accepted this book as scripture for 2,000 years and modern-day prophets have confirmed that it is scripture.

I will refer to Paul as the writer of Hebrews because it is conventional to do so, not because I am taking a position on the question of who wrote the book.

The LDS Bible Dictionary has a good outline of Hebrews. Here is another outline. These may help you better understand what you read by giving it a context. (This outline is based on that of G. W. Buchanan in To the Hebrews.)

My study questions will concentrate on passages from Hebrews 1-4 and 12.

Chapter 1

Verses 1-4: What does it mean to say that, prior to Christ, the Father had spoken “at sundry times and in divers manners”? Were those different than the way that he spoke through his Son?

Why is it important for us to know that the world was created through the Son?

Why is it important that we know that Christ has “the brightness of [the Father’s] glory” and that he is in “the express image of his person”?

What does it mean to say that the Son upholds all things by the word of his power? (The Greek word translated “upholding” means “carrying,” “bearing,” “bringing forth, “causing to continue.”)

Verses 4-14: Why is it important that we know that the Son is higher than the angels? In verses 7-8, what is the difference between God’s angels and ministers on the one hand and his Son on the other?

Chapter 2

Verse 1-4: What are “the things that we have heard” (verse 1)? What is Paul afraid will happen if we don’t pay heed to the things he has pointed out in chapter 1?

The word them in verse 1 is in italics because the translators inserted it in the text. There is nothing in the Greek original corresponding to that word, but they thought it was needed in order for the translation to make sense in English. Try ignoring that word. If you do, what does it mean to say “lest at any time we should let slip.” (The Greek word translated “let slip” means “glide by.”)

These verses warn against apostasy, and that warning occurs regularly in Hebrews. Are these warnings against individual apostasy or against the apostasy of the Church as a whole? What kind of apostasy does Paul have in mind? How are those warnings related to the main theme of Hebrews, namely the nature of Christ and his work?

What witnesses does Paul say the early Christians have of the Gospel (verses 3-4)? What witnesses do we have?

What is the significance of “according to his will” at the end of verse 4?

Verses 9-11: What is the overall point of these verses?

Christ has said “Follow me” (e.g., Matthew 16:24) and we have seen that Paul teaches that we are to imitate Christ (e.g., Romans 12:1-2). What do these verses teach us about what it means to follow or imitate Christ? For example, why did he suffer death and what does that suggest about our obligation as Christians?

Why does Paul remind us that dying made Jesus a little lower than the angels (verse 9)? Why did it?

How are his dying and his glorification connected? Does that teach us anything about our own possibility of being glorified?

What does it mean to say that Jesus is the captain (“leader”) of our salvation?

Verse 15: Of what bondage is Paul speaking? (See verse 14.) Who is he speaking of in this verse? He seems to be saying that the fear of death puts us into bondage. What does he mean?

Chapter 3

Verses 1-6: What makes us holy?

What makes us brothers and sisters to Christ (verse 1)?

What is “our profession”? Another translation is “confession.” The Greek word means “assurance,” “promise,” “admission,” and “concession.”

What makes Christ the Apostle of that profession? What makes him the High Priest of that profession?

Why does Paul compare Jesus to Moses?

Verses 7-19: In these verses Paul is speaking to the Israelites. How did ancient Israel err? Why would these verses have been important to the early Christians? Why are they important to us?

Chapter 4

Verses 1-2: Do these verses give an answer to the previous question? Explain Paul’s warning in your own words.

Why did the Israelites refuse to enter the Promised Land? (See Numbers 14:1-38.) What parallel to this is there in our own lives? Paul is using the Promised Land as a figure of God’s rest. What does “God’s rest” mean to us?

Verses 9-10: What does it mean to say that those who have entered God’s rest have ceased from their own works? How do we labor in order to enter into rest (verse 10)? Does this chapter have implications for how we understand the Sabbath?

Verses 14-16: Why do we need a Great High Priest (verse 14)? What does it mean to say that because we have that High Priest we should “hold fast our profession” (verse 14)?

Jesus taught that to look on a woman with lust in one’s heart is to sin (Matthew 5:28; 3 Nephi 12:28). That seems to mean that if we desire to do something we ought not, we sin. If that is true, how can it also be true that Jesus “was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin”? What must it mean to be tempted? What must it not mean?

The Greek word translated “tempted” here is the same one used in the Greek version of the Old Testament: Genesis 22:1; and Deuteronomy 8: 2 and 20:20. Do those verses help explain what it means to be tempted?

Chapter 12

Verse 1: What witnesses was Paul referring to? Why does he refer to them as a cloud? What does that metaphor convey? What are the weights he wishes us to lay aside?

Another translation of “easily beset” is “cling.” How does sin easily beset us, cling to us?

Explain the metaphor of the race.

Verse 2: Another translation of the Greek word translated “author” is “leader.” (This is the same word translated “captain” in 2:10.) If we translate the first sentence of the verse with “leader” instead of “author,” then Paul is continuing the metaphor of the race. How is Christ the leader in the race we find ourselves in?

If, instead, we translate the word as the King James translators have done, how is Christ the author— creator—of our faith? Is Paul continuing the metaphor according to that translation?

What does it mean to say that Christ is the finisher, the one who brings the race to a successful conclusion?

Please respond to this post at Feast upon the Word.