Latest / Reformed Thinking / χάρισμα (Charisma): God’s Gracious Gift for the Building of the Church

Transcript

χάρισμα (Charisma): God’s Gracious Gift for the Building of the Church · Reformed Thinking

0:00
You know, usually when we talk about a medical diagnosis, there
0:04
is this expectation of like absolute precision.
0:07
All right, demand for certainty. Yeah, like engineering.
0:09
You break your arm, the X-ray shows that jagged white line and
0:13
the doctor just points and says, well there it is.
0:15
It is visible. Broken or not broken, it is
0:18
clean, it is binary. And honestly, I mean it is
0:21
comforting. We like things to be
0:23
categorized, you know, to fit into a neat little box so we can
0:26
understand them. That is just a natural human
0:29
inclination. Yeah, we we want definitive
0:32
boundaries around the concepts that govern our lives.
0:35
But then you step into the world of ancient languages and
0:38
theology, and suddenly that X-ray machine is just broken.
0:41
Completely useless. You are looking at a linguistic
0:44
landscape that is murky, shifting, and highly dependent
0:46
on, well, who is actually speaking.
0:48
So welcome to reform thinking. Today we're looking at a set of
0:52
ancient documents that reveal what I can only describe as a
0:56
massive linguistic heist. That is a great way to put it.
1:00
We are going straight into the original source material to see
1:03
how one man took a set of ordinary vocabulary words and
1:07
completely reengineered them. And we are talking about the
1:10
Greek words karis, Charo, charisma and Eucharistio.
1:15
Right alongside their Old Testament Hebrew predecessors,
1:18
Hen and Hessen. The linguistic evolution here is
1:22
astonishing. I mean, words are not static
1:24
containers, you know? Yeah, they change shape based on
1:27
who is using them and what reality they're trying to
1:30
describe. Yeah, absolutely.
1:31
We're looking at historical moment where the vocabulary of
1:34
the ancient world was hijacked to describe something entirely
1:38
alien to human philosophy. And that is the hook.
1:40
For today's Deep dive. We're going to look at how a
1:43
secular Greek word used for like physical charm or for political
1:47
favors handed out by an emperor was taken by the Apostle Paul
1:50
and just shattered. Rebuilt from the ground up.
1:52
He reconstructed this word charis to articulate a radical,
1:56
unmerited favor from God. It is a theological earthquake.
2:00
This shift completely alters how you understand your own
2:02
salvation today. Assuming you are operating under
2:05
the system Paul laid out, of course.
2:07
Right. So let us jump right into the
2:09
anatomy of joy. The Greek word here is chiro for
2:12
the verb and Cara for the noun. If I am an average citizen
2:17
walking around ancient Athens, how am I viewing joy?
2:21
In profane Greek, joy was viewed quite simply as a direct
2:25
feeling, a raw emotion. Just a feeling.
2:28
Yeah, you see this heavily in the writings of Homer in the
2:31
Homeric epics. The seat of this emotion is
2:33
often located in the thymos. The Thymos.
2:36
Which you could translate as the inner self, the breath or the
2:39
heart. It was a phenomenon of self
2:41
perception. You experience something good
2:43
and you're fine. Most reacted.
2:44
OK, so it is the culmination of existence.
2:46
Precisely. Sometimes this reaction was so
2:49
overwhelming it led to physical manifestations like tears of
2:53
joy, which is a concept detailed in the writings of Aeschylus.
2:56
So it was a visceral, physical reaction to a good event.
3:00
You win a battle, you have a good harvest, your thymos reacts
3:03
and you weep. Spot on.
3:04
It was also the standard daily greeting when you met someone in
3:07
the marketplace. Sit chair like.
3:08
Hello. We translate that today as
3:10
hello. Yeah, but literally it is an
3:13
imperative verb meaning for rejoice.
3:15
You were commanding the person you met to experience a good
3:18
mood. OK, so it is the ancient
3:20
equivalent of telling someone you know have a good day.
3:23
Basically. But the Greek philosophers could
3:26
not just let an emotion exist without dissecting it, right?
3:29
They had to categorize everything.
3:31
How did the philosophers treat this raw, visceral reaction?
3:35
Well, in philosophy, joy became an object of intense reflection
3:38
and, frankly, a lot of suspicion.
3:41
Suspicion. Yeah, the Platonists, following
3:43
Plato, equated care of very closely with hidan, which means
3:47
pleasure. Plato defined it as a diffusion
3:50
and an easy flow of the soul. Like a smooth operation of your
3:53
inner life. Right, but the Stoics took a
3:55
very different, much more severe path.
3:58
I always associate the Stoics with an absolute phobia of
4:00
emotion. If I understand them correctly,
4:02
they wanted to be completely unbothered by the outside world.
4:05
That is highly accurate. The Stoics believed that all
4:08
typical emotions were defective judgments of logic.
4:12
Defective logic, yes. If you are sad because you lost
4:17
your property, you have made a logical error because you
4:20
assumed your property was yours to keep forever.
4:22
Wow, that is harsh. It is therefore they initially
4:28
viewed joy as the common person experienced it very negatively.
4:33
It was considered an irrational spike in emotion based on
4:36
fleeting external circumstances. Because anything irrational was
4:39
a threat to a stoic. I mean, if you let yourself feel
4:42
wild joy over a good harvest, you are setting yourself up for
4:45
wild despair when a drought hits.
4:47
Precisely. So.
4:48
Did they just outlawed joy entirely?
4:50
They could not completely eradicate human feeling, so to
4:53
mitigate this harsh view, the Stoics developed a doctrine of
4:56
Upathia. Eupathea.
4:57
What is that? It translates to good moods or
5:00
healthy passions. They classified true joy as in
5:03
Eupathea. But here is the catch.
5:04
There was always a catch. This elevated state of mind was
5:07
strictly reserved for the wise. For the stoic sage, joy was not
5:10
a wild, unpredictable emotion triggered by a good meal or a
5:13
military victory, right? It was a rational, justifiable
5:16
elation that occurred only when a wise person reflected on their
5:19
own virtue. Wait, let me make sure I'm
5:21
grasping this. The Stoic is sitting there,
5:23
completely detached from the chaos of the world, and the only
5:27
thing that brings them joy is thinking about how rational and
5:30
virtuous they are. Essentially, yes.
5:33
That sounds incredibly arrogant. It was an entirely closed loop.
5:37
It was self generated and self-directed.
5:40
The Stoic sage finds joy in their own internal harmony and
5:44
self activity. So it is a philosophical
5:46
achievement utterly distinct from the irrational everyday
5:50
pleasure that a normal citizen might experience.
5:52
Correct. So the Greeks either see joy as
5:55
a raw reaction to getting what you want, or as an elite,
5:58
arrogant satisfaction in your own perfect logic.
6:01
That covers the Greek side. Let us look at the Old Testament
6:04
and Judaism. The picture of joy has to change
6:07
here, right? Because the Hebrew worldview is
6:08
so different from the Greek philosophical vacuum.
6:11
The contrast is massive. In the Old Testament, joy moves
6:15
away from this cold philosophical self reflection
6:18
and becomes intensely relational and festal.
6:20
Festal like festivals? Yes, the Hebrew vocabulary uses
6:25
words like samak and Gil. These words do not describe a
6:29
private internal state of mind achieved through intense
6:33
concentration. They describe a disposition of
6:36
the whole person, and it is almost always expressed in
6:39
communal celebrations. You mean like the harvest
6:41
festivals and the feast days? Yeah, worship in the Old
6:44
Testament is loud and communal. The specific reason for joy in
6:48
the Hebrew Scriptures is concrete demonstrations of
6:51
salvation. Like historical events?
6:53
Right. God helps.
6:54
God rescues the nation from an enemy, God provides the rain,
6:58
and the people rejoice together. Furthermore, it is inherently
7:02
tied to eschatological hope. Eschatological meaning looking
7:06
forward to the end times or the final fulfillment of God's
7:08
promises. That's correct.
7:10
The joy is not just about what God did yesterday.
7:12
It is fueled by the expectation of God's future deliverance.
7:16
OK, that makes sense. You see this eschatological
7:18
angle heavily in the Qumran Scrolls, the text produced by
7:21
the Jewish sect living near the Dead Sea.
7:24
The Dead Sea Scrolls I know that community was living out in the
7:27
desert, isolated, waiting for the end of the world.
7:31
How did they write about joy while living in such harsh
7:33
conditions? Well, in the Qumran community,
7:35
everlasting joy becomes a fixed catchword.
7:38
They link this joy directly to God's truth and their status as
7:42
the elect. Even out in the desert, yes.
7:44
Yeah, what is fascinating is that even in the midst of their
7:47
present suffering, their isolation and their severe
7:50
lifestyle, they believe they could rejoice because they were
7:53
under God's protection. Oh, wow.
7:55
The joy they experienced was a sign of foretaste of the coming
7:58
age of God. It was not dependent on their
8:00
physical comfort in the desert. Then we get to a figure who
8:03
tries to bridge these two worlds, Philo of Alexandria.
8:07
He was a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher living right around
8:10
the time of Jesus. A very pivotal figure.
8:13
He is looking at the Greek philosophical tradition and he
8:15
is looking at his Jewish heritage.
8:17
What does he do with the concept of joy?
8:19
Philo makes a brilliant radical theological move.
8:23
He takes the Greek philosophical concept and completely subverts
8:26
it. The Stoic sage, as we discussed,
8:29
tried to attain joy through his own internal harmony.
8:32
Philo argues the joy is native to God alone.
8:35
God is the only being who possesses joy intrinsically.
8:39
Wait, so human beings do not actually possess their own joy?
8:42
According to Philo, human beings only experience true joy through
8:46
a mystical union with God. You do not generate it.
8:50
They cannot manufacture it by being virtuous enough or by
8:53
experiencing enough pleasure. You can only receive it as a
8:56
byproduct of interacting with the divine.
8:59
That is a massive shift. It is.
9:01
Philo even goes into the Old Testament and uses the figure of
9:04
Isaac as an allegorical symbol. Isaac.
9:07
Why Isaac? Because Isaac's name in Hebrew
9:09
literally means laughter or he laughs.
9:12
For Philo, Isaac becomes a literal symbol of joy itself.
9:15
I love that connection. Isaac isn't just a historical
9:17
patriarch. In Philo's mind, he represents
9:20
the very concept of divine laughter and joy.
9:22
Precisely. This idea that you do not
9:24
generate joy but receive it from the outside sets the stage
9:27
perfectly for the New Testament writers.
9:28
How do the gospel writers handle this?
9:30
If we look at the Gospel of Luke, joy is constantly linked
9:34
to epiphanies and defining what was previously lost.
9:37
Oh. Right.
9:38
Think of the birth narrative. The angels appear to the
9:41
shepherds and announce good tidings of great joy.
9:43
The joy arrives from outside the human sphere.
9:46
And the parables, right? Yes.
9:47
Consider the parables in Luke 15.
9:49
The lost sheep, the lost coin, the prodigal son.
9:53
In every instance there is a massive celebration, a joy in
9:56
heaven over 1 Sinner who repents is the joy of rescue.
10:01
It is the complete opposite of the Stoic.
10:03
The Stoic finds joy in never making a mistake.
10:06
The Luke and joy is found when the person who made all the
10:08
mistakes is finally brought home.
10:10
That is a highly accurate summary.
10:12
And then the apostle Paul takes this concept of joy and adds a
10:15
severe layer of paradox to it. Because Paul is writing from
10:18
prison half the time. Yes, Pauline Joy is highly
10:21
eschatological, like the Qumran community, but it is maintained
10:25
precisely in the face of brutal suffering.
10:27
Paul writes to the Philippians about rejoicing in the Lord
10:30
while he is chained to a guard. For Paul, joy is a fruit of the
10:34
Spirit. It is entirely untethered from
10:37
favorable earthly circumstances. So the Romans can't take it from
10:40
him. The Roman Empire can take his
10:41
freedom, strip his back with a whip and put him in a damn cell,
10:45
but they cannot touch his joy because the Roman Empire is not
10:48
the source of his joy. That brings us to the Gospel of
10:51
John, which introduces a phrase that I find incredibly
10:54
compelling, perfect joy. How does John define perfect
10:58
joy, especially when his narrative is heading straight
11:00
toward a crucifixion? John's Gospel operates on a very
11:04
distinct theological plane. In John, joy is fulfilled or
11:08
made perfect, not because a person reaches some
11:10
psychological or emotional climax, but because the object
11:13
of joy has appeared. And that object is Jesus.
11:16
Correct. Throughout the Farewell
11:18
Discourse is the final chapters before the arrest.
11:20
Jesus tells his disciples that they will experience sorrow.
11:24
The Greek word used there is like he tells them, the cosmos.
11:27
The world system that is opposed to God, will rejoice at his
11:30
death. The world will think it has one.
11:33
The disciples will weep and lament.
11:35
But it doesn't end there, no. Jesus promises that their sorrow
11:40
will be turned into joy. The resurrection will turn their
11:43
leap into an indestructible character that thrives despite
11:47
the world's hatred. I want to pause here and think
11:50
about the psychological reality of this.
11:52
Think about how modern society operates.
11:54
We chase the ancient, profane Greek version of joy.
11:58
We certainly do. We define happiness strictly by
12:01
positive happenings. If my bank account is full, if
12:04
my health is good, if my relationships are smooth, I have
12:06
joy. The second of those external
12:09
circumstances fracture. I lose it completely.
12:12
We are exhausted from trying to manufacture this good mood.
12:14
It is an exhausting cycle. But if joy is truly a divine
12:17
attribute, as Philo and John suggest, doesn't that make our
12:20
modern pursuit entirely backward?
12:22
We are trying to produce something internally that can
12:25
only be received from the outside.
12:27
The modern pursuit is a futile exercise if the biblical writers
12:30
are correct. If joy is intrinsically tied to
12:33
the presence of God and the reality of the resurrection,
12:37
then attempting to generate it through external stimuli or
12:40
sheer willpower is like trying to light a fire underwater.
12:43
A. Fire underwater.
12:44
I like that. The biblical writers untethered
12:46
joy from earthly circumstances because earthly circumstances
12:50
are fragile. Divine reality is not.
12:53
Joy is the emotional reaction, but you cannot just conjure up
12:56
an emotional reaction out of thin air.
12:58
There has to be a catalyst. Always a catalyst cast.
13:00
For the writers of the New Testament, that catalyst is
13:03
receiving an unearned gift, which brings us directly to the
13:06
Old Testament roots of grace. Before we can understand what
13:09
Paul did with the Greek word chorus, we need to understand
13:13
the Hebrew soil he grew up in. We are looking at 2 Hebrew words
13:16
here, Hen and he's. Let's start with hen.
13:19
Hen, spelled HHEN in English transliteration, derives from
13:23
the verb hanan. This word denotes a very
13:26
specific physical action. What kind of action?
13:28
It describes a stronger, superior party stooping down in
13:32
kindness to a weaker afflicted party.
13:35
It is a one way movement from the person who possesses
13:37
resources to the person who has absolutely nothing.
13:40
OK, a one way movement. Yes, when a beggar in the Old
13:44
Testament cries at Hanani, they're crying out.
13:46
Have mercy on me or be gracious to me.
13:48
So it is the cry of the defeated soldier looking up at the
13:51
Conqueror sword, or the starving widow asking the wealthy
13:55
landowner for grain. It is a desperate plea based
13:58
entirely on the discrepancy in their status.
14:01
That is the original verbal action.
14:03
But over centuries of usage the noun form hen evolved.
14:08
It began to detach from the action of the giver and attached
14:11
itself to the recipient. Detached from the giver, yes.
14:14
It came to me in the charm or the aesthetic favor that a
14:16
person possessed. How does that shift happen?
14:18
How do you go from a king stooping down to a beggar to
14:21
aesthetic charm? It happens because if a superior
14:24
stoop stand to help you, it must be because there's something
14:28
about you that caught their eye. Oh, I see.
14:30
The phrase to find favor in the eyes of someone becomes very
14:34
common in the Hebrew text. The text says Noah found favor
14:37
in the eyes of the Lord. Joseph found favor in the eyes
14:40
of Potiphar, the Egyptian captain.
14:42
So they had a quality that drew favor.
14:44
Yes, it indicates an attractiveness, A gracefulness,
14:47
or a certain quality that elicits a positive response from
14:50
the person in power. So hens shifts from being an
14:53
action of rescue by the strong to a quality of charm possessed
14:56
by the weak. I understand that, but what
14:59
about Hens? This is a massive word in Old
15:02
Testament theology. Entire books have been written
15:04
just trying to pin this word down.
15:06
Heste is notoriously complex to translate in English Bibles.
15:10
You will see it rendered as steadfast love, loving kindness,
15:13
mercy, or covenant grace, right? Unlike Hanan, which is a
15:16
movement from a superior to an inferior, often between
15:19
strangers, Hest operates strictly within an established
15:22
relationship. It is relational covenantal
15:24
conduct. Can you give me an example of
15:26
where HEST operates outside of just God and humanity?
15:29
How did people show HEST to each other?
15:31
You see it operating between hosts and guests who had very
15:35
strict cultural rules of protection.
15:38
You see it between relatives like Ruth and Naomi.
15:41
You see it between rulers and subjects.
15:43
And you know, you see it as the defining characteristic between
15:47
Yahweh and the nation of Israel. I know there's been a lot of
15:50
academic debate over his deed. Some scholars argue it is just a
15:54
legal duty. If you sign a contract, you owe
15:57
the other person hesed. Is it just a cold legal
16:00
obligation? That was a prominent academic
16:02
theory for a while. That hesed is a mode of conduct
16:06
corresponding to a relation of right and duty.
16:08
Like a lease agreement? Exactly like that.
16:11
The argument was that if two parties are in the covenant,
16:13
hesity is simply the legal obligation they owe each other,
16:16
like fulfilling the terms of a leased agreement.
16:18
But that feels a bit hollow. It is a closer examination of
16:22
the textual evidence proves that this is a misunderstanding.
16:25
Hesit is not a mechanical obligation.
16:27
It retains A crucial element of spontaneous freedom.
16:30
So it is expected, but it cannot be forced.
16:33
Precisely. It is loving conduct that goes
16:36
far beyond what can be legally mandated or extracted in a court
16:39
of law. This is why he said is
16:42
frequently paired in the Old Testament with the Hebrew word
16:45
amet. Amet what does that translate
16:47
to? It translates to truth,
16:49
reliability, or faithfulness. I always try to find a modern
16:53
equivalent for this. Think of a marriage vow.
16:56
The legal structure of a marriage exists, right?
16:58
The state issues a certificate. There is a legal contract.
17:02
If one person breaks it, there are legal consequences.
17:05
But the love, the daily kindness, the patience given
17:09
within that structure is entirely free and spontaneous.
17:12
That is a solid analogy. I mean, a judge can order you to
17:15
pay alimony, but a judge cannot legally order you to love your
17:18
spouse or to be patient when they're sick.
17:20
The legal framework is the container, but the hesit is the
17:23
free affection poured into it. That captures a large part of
17:26
it. However, where that human
17:28
analogy breaks down slightly is the issue of failure.
17:31
How so? In a human marriage, if one
17:33
party repeatedly breaks the covenant, the other party's
17:36
obligation to show affection usually dissolves.
17:40
In the Old Testament, the massive theological tension
17:43
surrounding siserratet is God's response to Israel's constant
17:47
failure. Right, because Israel breaks the
17:49
covenant constantly. They worship other gods.
17:51
They oppress the poor. They ignore the prophets.
17:54
And in the great hymnal Predications of Yahweh, such as
17:57
in Exodus 34 Gods, he said it is paired directly with his
18:00
identity as a jealous judge. Both at the same time.
18:03
Yes, the text says he visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the
18:07
children, which is the legal consequence of breaking the
18:09
covenant. But in the exact same breath, it
18:12
says he shows he sits to thousands of generations.
18:16
So there is a tension, but the scale tips heavily, heavily
18:20
toward grace. It does, and as you move into
18:22
the prophets, particularly the writings we categorize as Second
18:25
Isaiah, he said is illustrated by pointing backward, not to the
18:29
sign of covenant, which was highly conditional and law
18:31
based, but to the Noicic and Davidic covenants.
18:34
Remind me why those two specific covenants are so vital here?
18:37
Because they are pure covenants of unmerited favor.
18:41
When God makes the covenant with Noah after the flood, he puts
18:45
the rainbow in the sky and promises never to flood the
18:48
earth again. Without conditions.
18:50
Exactly. He does not attach a legal
18:52
condition to it. He does not say I will not flood
18:55
the earth as long as humans behaves.
18:57
He says he will not do it, period.
18:59
And the Davidic covenant. The Davidic covenant is similar.
19:02
God promises David an eternal dynasty regardless of the
19:05
flawless performance of his descendants.
19:08
Yahweh's covenant grace is shown as a gracious condescension that
19:11
does not depend on human perfection.
19:14
OK, so we have these two Hebrew concepts, hen the stooping favor
19:17
that turns into charm and hence the feels loyal, spontaneous,
19:21
covenant love. Correct.
19:23
Fast forward a few centuries. The Jewish people are dispersed
19:26
throughout the Mediterranean. They are speaking Greek.
19:29
They need a Greek translation of their Hebrew scriptures, which
19:31
becomes the Septuagint. The translators are sitting
19:34
there looking at hen and hez. What Greek word do they pull off
19:37
the shelf to capture these massive ideas?
19:40
They predominantly chose the Greek word cress.
19:42
But if I am a Greek merchant living in Alexandria in the 1st
19:45
century, and I pick up the Septuagint and read the word
19:48
charis, I am not thinking about Yahweh's covenant loyalty.
19:53
What baggage am I bringing to that word?
19:55
What did Karis actually mean on the street?
19:58
To profane Greek speaker, Karis originally meant that which
20:02
delights. It was an aesthetic charm, like
20:04
finding. Favor in someones eyes.
20:06
Yes, it was the element of the pleasing in the beautiful.
20:09
It's a happy state of fortune. It was even used to describe the
20:12
magic of love. If a person had Karis, they were
20:14
charming, witty and physically attractive.
20:17
That sounds almost identical to the later evolution of the
20:20
Hebrew word hen. It is a superficial aesthetic
20:23
quality. It's very similar, but in the
20:26
Hellenistic period, as the political structures of the
20:28
Empire grew, the usage of Karis expanded significantly.
20:32
It became a highly political term.
20:33
Political. How it was used to describe a
20:36
ruler's favor. If an emperor or a regional
20:39
prefect granted a charis, it meant they were displaying royal
20:42
generosity. They might pardon a criminal or
20:45
lower the taxes for a specific city.
20:47
That political action was a charis.
20:49
So it is an aesthetic charm and it is a political pardon.
20:53
Is there a religious angle to the word in the secular Greek
20:57
world? Yes, in the later text known as
21:00
the Hermetic writings, which reflect the religious mysticism
21:03
of late antiquity. What did it mean there?
21:05
In these texts, karis became viewed as a religious potency.
21:09
It was seen as a literal, almost physical substance or force
21:13
flowing downward from the divine realm into human beings.
21:17
It was a mystical energy that you could receive to elevate
21:20
your soul. That is a lot of baggage for one
21:22
word, charm, political amnesty and mystical energy.
21:26
But before we get to Paul, we have to look at the other major
21:29
influence on his life, the rabbinic tradition.
21:32
Paul was a Pharisee of Pharisees.
21:34
How did the rabbis in the centuries surrounding the New
21:36
Testament view the concept of grace?
21:38
The rabbinic view of grace is highly structured and incredibly
21:41
logical. The Rabbi's taught that human
21:44
beings receive rewards based on their acts.
21:46
So it's about what you do. Yes, the overarching dominant
21:49
schema is the law, the Torah. Within that legal system, grace
21:53
certainly exists, but it's strictly supplementary.
21:56
Supplementary meaning it only kicks in when you fall short.
21:59
Precisely, it is applied only when a person's good works run
22:02
out. The Rabbi's actually debated the
22:04
mechanics of this. They concluded that no human
22:07
being could ever achieve absolute perfection under the
22:10
law, stating that even Abraham needed grace.
22:13
Wow, even Abraham. Abraham, the patriarch of the
22:16
faith, did not have enough good works to tip the cosmic scales
22:19
on his own. But the grace was still caught
22:22
within the mechanism of the law. It was an add on feature, not
22:25
the main engine. That is a very apartment way to
22:27
describe it. Judaism at that time could not
22:30
accept the strict alternative of works or our grace.
22:34
They did not see them as mutually exclusive.
22:36
They worked together, yes. Grace was the divine backup plan
22:40
for human insufficiency. You do the heavy lifting of
22:43
keeping the Torah, you study the law, you observe the Sabbath.
22:47
And when you inevitably fall short, God's grace covers the
22:49
deficit. We talked about Philo earlier,
22:52
bridging the Greek and Hebrew concepts of joy.
22:55
Did he try to bridge this gap with grace as well?
22:58
Philo attempted a synthesis. He taught that God is
23:01
continuously active in giving grace.
23:03
In fact, he viewed the very act of creation bringing matter into
23:08
existence as a primary grace from God.
23:10
But. Did he bridge the rabbinic
23:12
structure? When it came to the redemption
23:14
of an individual, Philo vacillated.
23:17
He struggled to break free from the rabbinic structure.
23:19
He sometimes argued that grace is only granted to the
23:22
righteous, that you must prove yourself worthy of it first, and
23:26
if you act wickedly, the grace vanishes.
23:29
I want to look at the psychological setup because this
23:31
is fascinating. If you look at the rabbinic
23:34
concept of supplementary grace, that is precisely how human
23:37
psychology naturally operates today.
23:40
Or without a doubt, if you go out onto the street and ask the
23:42
average person how they think they relate to God or the
23:45
universe or karma, they naturally default to a system of
23:48
I do my absolute best, I try to be a good person and God makes
23:51
up the difference. It is the most intuitive
23:53
religious framework for the human mind.
23:55
Right, I earn my paycheck and if I fall short on my rent by $50,
23:59
maybe my landlord gives me a grace period.
24:02
It makes logical sense. So if this makes so much sense,
24:05
how does this setup create such a catastrophic collision with
24:09
the Apostle Paul? It creates a total collision
24:11
because Paul takes a sledgehammer to this human
24:15
centric supplementary view of grace.
24:17
Because he tried it himself. Exactly.
24:19
Paul's own background is crucial here.
24:21
He was a Pharisee. He tried the supplementary
24:24
system, he tried to achieve righteousness through rigorous
24:27
adherence to the law, and it led him to become a murderer,
24:30
persecuting the early church. So the system failed him.
24:33
When he encounters the risen Christ on the road to Damascus,
24:36
his entire theological framework shatters.
24:39
What Paul does with the Greek word karis in his letters is a
24:42
master class in theological restructuring.
24:45
Let us unpack Paul's radical reconstruction.
24:47
He takes this word Karis, which is loaded with ideas about
24:51
charm, political favors and backup plans.
24:53
And he strips all of that away. He strips it completely.
24:56
Paul takes Cheris and ties it exclusively and permanently to
25:00
the cross of Christ. In Paul's theology, the concepts
25:03
of sola gratia, salvation by grace alone, and solified
25:07
salvation by faith alone are inextricable.
25:09
Bound together, grace is entirely free.
25:12
It has to be free. It is absolutely unmerited and,
25:15
most importantly, it stands in absolute diametric opposition to
25:18
the law. Opposed to the law, meaning they
25:21
cannot coexist as a means of salvation.
25:23
Correct. In his letters to the Romans,
25:25
specifically chapters 3 and 4, and in his letter to the
25:28
Galatians, he makes it explicitly clear the grace is
25:31
not a supplement to works. It replaces the system of works
25:34
entirely. So it's not a backup plan
25:36
anymore. No.
25:37
If salvation is by works, it is a wage owed to you.
25:40
If it is by grace, it is a gift. You cannot mix a wage and a
25:43
gift. And he does not just treat Grace
25:46
as a static legal pardon, does he?
25:48
It is not just a judge banging A gavel and saying you are free to
25:50
go. Not at all.
25:52
In Romans chapter 5, Paul presents grace as a dynamic,
25:55
aggressive force. He writes that where sin
25:58
increased, grace abounded all the more.
26:00
An aggressive force. Yes, he contrasted with the
26:03
reality of death. Death comes to humanity as a
26:07
destiny, a relentless mechanical force that no human can escape.
26:12
Grace, however, operates as a free election from God.
26:15
It interrupts the cycle. It breaks the mechanical cycle
26:17
of sin and death. It is an active intervention, an
26:20
invasion from the outside that enters the human situation and
26:24
overcomes sin. I want to focus on the
26:27
psychological result of this invasion.
26:30
Because it comes from the outside, and because the human
26:32
being contributes absolutely nothing to it, it completely
26:34
destroys any ground for human boasting.
26:37
That is the structural difference of Pauline grace
26:39
compared to the rabbinic view. Pauline grace is not merely the
26:42
subjective appropriation of salvation by a person trying
26:45
their best. The grace is the salvation event
26:47
itself. In Romans 4, Paul says something
26:50
that would have sounded blasphemous to a Pharisee.
26:52
He says God justifies the ungodly.
26:54
Not the righteous, the ungodly. If grace were supplementary, as
26:58
the rabbi's taught, human boasting remains intact.
27:01
You could stand before God and say, I did my 60%, I kept the
27:04
rules, and you did the remaining 40%.
27:07
We made a good team. You could take credit.
27:09
By making grace absolute, by insisting on sola gratia, Paul
27:14
entirely remove human merit from the equation.
27:18
All boasting is annihilated, and this reliance on grace continues
27:22
even after salvation. Right, it doesn't stop at
27:24
conversion. In 2nd Corinthians 12, Paul
27:27
pleads with God to remove a thorn in his flesh, a severe
27:30
affliction. God's response is not to remove
27:33
the pain, but to say my grace is sufficient for you, for my power
27:38
is made perfect in weakness. So even his endurance is grace.
27:41
Paul's Apostolic authority, his survival, and his daily
27:44
endurance are attributed solely to this karras.
27:47
I have an analogy I want to run by you to see if it captures the
27:50
severity of what Paul is arguing.
27:52
The rabbinic supplementary view of grace is like throwing a life
27:56
preserver to someone who is drowning in the ocean.
27:58
I'll. Be a drowning man.
27:59
Right. The swimmer still has to kick
28:01
their legs, they still have to reach out and grab the ring, and
28:03
they still have to hold on tight while the boat pulls them in.
28:06
The swimmer does their part. The life preserver does its
28:08
part. It is a cooperative effort.
28:10
That fits through rabbinic view, yes.
28:12
But Paul's view of grace isn't throwing a life preserver to a
28:15
drowning swimmer. Paul's view of Grace is a diver
28:19
going to the bottom of the ocean floor, picking up a corpse that
28:22
has been dead for three days, hauling it into the boat and
28:26
breathing life back into its lungs.
28:28
The corpse does nothing. The corpse contributes
28:29
absolutely nothing to the rescue.
28:31
It cannot kick, it cannot grab. It is completely passive.
28:34
That analogy highlights the theological core of Paul's
28:37
argument, the total lack of human contribution.
28:40
In Ephesians 2, Paul literally uses the phrase dead in
28:45
trespasses and sins. A dead entity cannot reach for a
28:49
life preserver. The grace must be a resurrecting
28:52
force. But if I am hearing this in the
28:54
1st century, or even today, my immediate reaction is panic.
28:57
This raises a massive push back, one that Paul actually
29:00
anticipated and addressed in Romans 6.
29:02
The classic objection. If grace is totally free, if it
29:06
pulls A corpse out of the water without asking the corpse to
29:08
promise to be good beforehand, and if it covers all sin without
29:12
any requirement of prior merit, doesn't that just encourage
29:15
terrible behavior? It sounds like a license to SIN.
29:17
Yeah, if the rules do not save me, what stops me from living an
29:22
absolutely wicked life? Why not sin so that grace may
29:26
abound? That is the most logical counter
29:28
argument from anyone who has spent their life operating under
29:32
a system of law. If you remove the threat of
29:34
punishment, the system collapses.
29:36
Exactly. But Paul refutes this by
29:39
pointing out that this pseudo logic fails to understand the
29:43
actual nature of the grace that has been imparted.
29:46
How so? Because grace is not just a
29:48
legal pardon that leaves the criminal unchanged.
29:51
Grace is an impartation of divine life.
29:53
It is the destruction of the old self.
29:55
The old self is gone. Paul argues that if you have
29:58
been united with Christ and a death like His, you are raised
30:01
to walk in newness of life. You cannot be a corpse raised
30:05
from the dead by grace and then actively desire to climb back
30:08
into the coffin and stay at the bottom of the ocean.
30:09
Right, the very nature of the person is altered.
30:12
The nature of the resurrected life is that it desires the
30:14
things of God. The answer to the pushback lies
30:17
in what the grace actually produces within the believer.
30:20
It changes the internal desires, and that leads us directly into
30:24
the tangible results of grace, the transition from grace to
30:27
gifts. The Greek word here is charisma.
30:31
How does this word connect linguistically to charis?
30:34
Charisma is a late coin Greek construct.
30:37
It is built upon the root charis, but it adds the suffix a
30:41
ma. Suffix ma.
30:42
What does that do? In Greek grammar, adding a ma to
30:45
a root verb or noun denotes the concrete physical result of that
30:49
action. So if charis is the abstract
30:51
action of unmerited favor, charisma is the tangible,
30:55
concrete result of that favor. Oh, that makes sense.
30:57
It essentially translates to a gift graciously given.
30:59
Paul uses this word constantly, doesn't.
31:01
He he does in the entire New Testament.
31:03
The word charisma is used almost exclusively in the Pauline
31:06
corpus. He adopts it to describe the
31:08
total overarching gift of salvation itself.
31:11
Like in Romans. Yes.
31:12
For example, in Romans 6.23 he writes the wages of sin is
31:16
death, but the free gift, the charisma of God is eternal life.
31:19
But he also uses it in a much more specific way, which is he
31:22
uses it to describe specific endowments, abilities, or
31:25
functions given to individual believers by the Holy Spirit.
31:28
Which brings us to the most chaotic church in the New
31:31
Testament, Corinth. The Corinthians always a mess.
31:35
The letters to the Corinthians reveal a church that was wild,
31:39
fractured and highly competitive.
31:42
How did the concept of Charisma play out in that specific
31:45
community? The Corinthian church was
31:47
heavily influenced by their surrounding Pagan culture, which
31:50
highly prized ecstatic spiritual manifestations.
31:54
In their church gatherings. They became obsessed with
31:56
phenomena like glossolalia, which is speaking in tongues or
32:00
intense prophetic utterances. They viewed these dramatic
32:03
supernatural displays as proof of spiritual superiority.
32:07
Yes, they believe that the Wilder and more incomprehensible
32:11
the ecstasy, the more spiritual the person was.
32:14
It became a status symbol, an elite marker that was creating
32:17
massive division and arrogance within the congregation.
32:21
So how does Paul handle a situation where people are using
32:23
God's gifts to inflate their own egos?
32:26
He does not deny that these supernatural things are
32:28
happening, but he put some severe guardrails around them.
32:31
Paul subjects these ecstatic manifestations to a strict
32:35
theological criterion. He points out the ambivalence of
32:38
ecstasy itself. What do you mean by ambivalence?
32:41
He reminds them that Pagan religions have ecstatic speech
32:44
and frenzied prophets too. Just because someone is speaking
32:47
in an ecstatic state does not mean the Holy Spirit is behind
32:50
it. That is a harsh reality check.
32:52
The true mark of the Spirit's operation is twofold.
32:55
Does the utterance confess Jesus as Lord, and does the gift build
32:59
up the gathered church? If it just brings attention to
33:02
the speaker, it fails the test. To organize this chaos, Paul
33:06
provides A fascinating structure in First Corinthians 12.
33:08
He outlines A triadic structure. Paul writes in First Corinthians
33:12
12.4 through 6 that there are varieties of gifts charismata
33:16
mediated by the same Spirit, there are varieties of
33:18
ministries diaconiae mediated by the same Lord referring to
33:22
Christ, and there are varieties of operations or activities and
33:25
are jamata mediated by the same God.
33:27
Spirit, Lord, God, the Trinity is embedded right there in the
33:31
structure of how a church service is supposed to operate.
33:34
That is correct. This triadic presentation takes
33:37
a wild multiplicity of phenomena, all these different
33:39
people doing different things, and binds them into a unity of
33:43
divine manifestation. It unifies the chaos.
33:46
God does not give general uniform abilities to everyone.
33:50
He gives to each person their own specific customized gift,
33:54
but they all originate from the exact same Triune source.
33:58
What I find so striking about this passage is how Paul
34:00
completely levels the playing field.
34:03
Spiritual gifts are not magical abilities meant to boost the ego
34:07
of the person wielding them. They are not badges of honor.
34:10
Not at all. They are provisional
34:11
eschatological tools meant solely for building up the other
34:14
people in the room. Furthermore, the source text
34:17
explicitly dismantles a modern false divide that plagues many
34:21
traditions. Today.
34:22
We often see a stark division between what we call
34:24
charismatics, people who emphasize wild, spontaneous,
34:28
miraculous gifts, and office bearers, people who emphasize
34:31
structured, ordained administrative roles.
34:34
We act like those are two different religions.
34:36
But Paul's theology proves that the Spirit himself posits order.
34:40
The gift of administration or the gift of helping the sick is
34:44
listed right alongside the gift of healing or the gift of
34:48
speaking in tongues. They are all charismata.
34:52
Think about the modern Christian obsession with taking spiritual
34:56
gift inventories. We treat it like taking a
34:59
personality test to find out what Hogwarts House we belong
35:02
to. It does feel like that.
35:03
We want an assessment to tell us we are a prophet or a teacher so
35:07
we can put it on a resume. But Paul grouped completely
35:10
mundane acts of assistance, like setting up shares, organizing a
35:14
meal train for a sick neighbor, or managing the church accounts
35:18
right alongside miraculous healings.
35:20
They're all from the same source.
35:21
They are all the concrete result of Keras.
35:23
You do not need a personality test to figure out how to be
35:26
useful to the person standing right in front of you.
35:29
That is a vital application of the text.
35:31
If the underlying grace is completely unmerited, then the
35:34
resulting gift is completely unearned.
35:37
You cannot boast about an administration administrative
35:39
skill any more than you can boast about a prophetic
35:41
utterance. Because you didn't invent it.
35:43
You did not generate either of them.
35:45
Both are handed down from the same God for the exact same
35:48
purpose, which is the edification of the community.
35:50
Any boasting is entirely irrational.
35:53
So we have received this radical, unmerited grace charis
35:59
that pulls us from the bottom of the ocean, and we have been
36:02
equipped with unearned concrete gifts, charisma to help those
36:07
around us. That is the progression.
36:09
What is the only logical response left for the human
36:12
being in this scenario? If I can't boast and I can't
36:15
earn it, what do I do? The only thing left is
36:17
Thanksgiving. The Greek word is Eucharistio.
36:21
Let us look at the secular background of this word first.
36:23
In Greek secular use, the word group surrounding Eucharistio
36:27
meant showing a favor or demonstrating basic gratitude.
36:30
It was often used in political context.
36:31
Political again? Yes.
36:33
If a Hellenistic king forgave a city's tax debt or provided
36:36
grain during a famine, the City Council would issue a formal
36:39
decree of Eucharistia. They would carve their gratitude
36:42
into a stone monument to publicly acknowledge the King's
36:45
favor. It was a public acknowledgement
36:47
of a debt owed. What about in Jewish practice?
36:49
How did they express gratitude? It is an interesting linguistic
36:52
quirk that the ancient Hebrew language actually actually
36:55
lacked a direct single equivalent word for the abstract
36:59
Greek concept of gratitude. Really.
37:03
So how did they say thank you? Religious thanks were expressed
37:06
through action. They offered a thank offering at
37:08
the temple, or they sang a song of Thanksgiving, which is why
37:12
the Psalms are filled with praises recounting God's
37:14
specific actions. Oh, that makes sense.
37:16
It was lived out. In later Jewish practice moving
37:19
toward the rabbinic era, it became a strict codified
37:22
requirement to bless every single item of food.
37:26
The Talmud explicitly states that it is forbidden for a
37:30
person to enjoy anything in this world without first uttering a
37:33
benediction. So Thanksgiving becomes heavily
37:35
tied to the physical consumption of food.
37:37
But Philo, our philosopher friend in Alexandria, took this
37:40
very physical practice and spiritualized it, didn't he?
37:42
Yes, Philo looked at the temple sacrifices and the physical
37:45
offerings and argued that true Thanksgiving is actually inward
37:49
veneration rather than a material offering.
37:51
Why did he think that? He reasoned that because God is
37:55
the creator of all things, He have no physical needs.
37:58
Offering God physical animals or grain misses the point because
38:02
he already owns them. You can't give a stake to the
38:04
guy who owns all the cattle in the world and expect him to be
38:07
impressed. Precisely, therefore, Philo
38:10
stated that the proper Thanksgiving is the praise of
38:12
the mind. He wrote that the most
38:14
appropriate work for God is to benefit creation, and the most
38:17
appropriate work for creation is to give thanks, because creation
38:21
has absolutely nothing else it can possibly give in return.
38:24
Which brings us back to Paul and how he uses the word Eucharistio
38:28
in his letters. If you read the New Testament,
38:30
almost every single letter Paul writes starts with this word.
38:34
Paul Masters what scholars call the epistolary Thanksgiving.
38:37
Epistolary meaning letter writing.
38:39
Yes, it was a common Hellenistic practice to start a formal
38:42
letter with a brief, polite word of thanks to the Pagan gods for
38:46
health or safe travels. But Paul takes this standard
38:49
cultural form, this polite preamble, and injects it with
38:52
massive theological weight. He makes it count.
38:55
He does not just say, I thank the gods you are healthy.
38:58
He thanks God for the faith, the love, and the grace that are
39:02
visibly operating in the churches he is writing to.
39:04
He is thanking God for the spiritual realities occurring in
39:07
other people. But there is a deeper
39:09
theological mechanism here regarding how Paul views prayer
39:13
itself. It isn't just a human being
39:15
deciding to speak to God. No, for Paul, prayer and
39:18
Thanksgiving are the work of the Spirit.
39:21
There is a Latin theological concept called a ratio infusa,
39:24
an infused prayer. Break that down for me.
39:27
What does an infused prayer look like?
39:29
It means that a human being left to their own devices in their
39:32
natural state of rebellion, has no desire to give true thanks to
39:35
God. Therefore, the grace given by
39:38
God must first flow into the believer.
39:41
The grace starts the engine. That grace changes the heart and
39:44
then flows back to God in the form of Thanksgiving, which
39:46
magnifies His glory. God's prevenient act, His action
39:50
that comes before our response, is the absolute prerequisite for
39:54
our ability to even formulate a prayer of thanks.
39:56
And it goes through a mediator. Furthermore, in the New
39:59
Testament, official Thanksgiving is always directed to God the
40:02
Father through Christ acting as the mediator.
40:05
That concept of oration, shoe and fusa is staggering.
40:08
It completely removes the idea that I'm doing God a favor by
40:12
praying to Him. Let me try an analogy to
40:15
visualize this. It is like breathing.
40:17
Breathing OK. The unmerited grace of God, the
40:20
Charis, is the inhale. The Thanksgiving, the
40:24
Eucharistio, is the exhale. You cannot possibly have one
40:27
without the other. That is a perfect picture.
40:30
If you are not inhaling grace, your lungs are empty.
40:33
You have no breath to exhale. In gratitude.
40:35
You cannot force an exhale if you haven't inhaled.
40:38
That is physiologically and theologically precise.
40:41
Thanksgiving is not polite etiquette.
40:43
It is not writing a thank you note to your grandmother for a
40:45
sweater. It is survival.
40:47
Because humanity is spiritually bankrupt and has nothing of
40:50
value to offer God. Thanksgiving is the ultimate
40:53
recognition of absolute dependence.
40:55
You are acknowledging that every breath, every gift, every moment
40:59
of joy originated outside of yourself.
41:01
This raises A terrifying question about the opposite
41:04
reaction. What happens when humanity fails
41:07
to give thanks? If Thanksgiving is the natural
41:10
exhale of a healthy spiritual lung, what does a refusal to
41:13
give thanks look like? Look at Romans chapter 1.
41:16
A very heavy chapter. Paul outlines the descent of
41:19
humanity into total darkness, idolatry, and societal collapse,
41:23
and he pinpoints the exact root cause of the entire disaster, he
41:27
writes. Although they knew God, they did
41:29
not honor Him as God or give thanks to Him.
41:32
That verse is the crux of human rebellion.
41:34
The failure to give thanks isn't just bad manners, it is the
41:37
fundamental rejection of God. Because refusing to give thanks
41:41
is a refusal to acknowledge dependence.
41:43
It is the deliberate construction of the illusion of
41:46
self-sufficiency. If I do not give thanks, I'm
41:49
implicitly claiming that I generated my own success, my own
41:52
joy, my own life. I become my own God.
41:55
If you think you earned your salvation through the rabbinic
41:57
supplementary system, or if you think you generated your own joy
42:00
through stoic self reflection, or if you think your spiritual
42:03
gifts are just your own innate genetic talents, you will never
42:05
truly give thanks. You can't.
42:08
You have no reason to. You might congratulate yourself,
42:10
you might feel a sense of relief, but you will not
42:13
experience Eucharistio. You will suffocate on your own
42:16
pride. As we look at the early church
42:19
moving past the New Testament era, we see a fascinating
42:22
linguistic shift with this word Eucharistio that ties all of
42:27
this physical and spiritual reality together.
42:30
Oh, in the later documents. In texts like the Didac, which
42:33
is an early church manual in the letters of Ignatius of Antioch,
42:37
Eucharistio moved from being the prayer spoken at the communal
42:40
meal to becoming the name for the meal itself.
42:43
It became the Eucharist, yes. The early Christians gathered to
42:47
partake of the bread and the wine, the physical elements
42:50
representing the ultimate unmerited grace of Christ's
42:52
broken body and shed blood. The prayer of Thanksgiving
42:55
spoken over that meal was so central, so defining to their
42:59
identity, that it gave its name to the elements and eventually
43:02
to the entire sacrament. The communal meal of grace
43:05
became known simply as the Thanksgiving.
43:07
That brings all the linguistic elements we have discussed today
43:10
together so beautifully. Let us look back and summarize
43:12
the progression we have traced through these ancient texts.
43:15
We have covered a lot of ground. We started with the emotional
43:18
anchor of Joy, Chero and Tara, watching it move from a secular,
43:23
visceral good mood to a cold, stoic achievement, and finally
43:28
to a divine attribute that thrives even in the darkest
43:31
suffering because it is tied to the resurrection.
43:34
The perfect joy. We looked back at the
43:36
covenantal, unmerited love of the Old Testament, it says,
43:39
where God Stoops down to his rebellious people time and time
43:42
again. We saw how Paul took the secular
43:45
political word Paris and weaponized it against human
43:48
boasting, defining it as the absolute unmerited favor of God
43:52
that pulls a dead corpse from the ocean floor and breathes
43:54
life into it. A total rescue mission.
43:57
We examined how that grace equips the believer with
44:00
tangible, concrete gifts. Charisma meant not for building
44:03
a personal empire, but for the mundane and miraculous building
44:07
up of the church community. And finally, we arrived at the
44:09
reflexive breath of gratitude, Eucharistio, the necessary
44:13
exhale of a soul that realizes it has received absolutely
44:16
everything and earned absolutely nothing.
44:19
It truly is a complete theological ecosystem.
44:21
It is a closed circuit of divine action.
44:24
Grace descends to the ungodly, gifts equip the community, joy
44:28
sustains the believer through the suffering of the world, and
44:31
Thanksgiving returns the glory to the source.
44:33
Which leaves us with a final lingering thought for you to
44:36
carry into your week. If Grace Karis is entirely
44:39
unearned and every capacity, skill and breath he possesses a
44:42
gift, charisma, that even your very ability to open your mouth
44:45
and say thank you Eucharistio is orchestrated by God.
44:48
It is all a gift. It is an infused breath.
44:51
How does viewing your own gratitude, not as a personal
44:53
achievement, not as proof that you are a polite, good person,
44:57
but as a divine gift itself alter the way you wake up
45:00
tomorrow? How does it change the way you
45:02
face a difficult diagnosis, a difficult neighbor, or a
45:05
difficult mirror? If you didn't earn any of it,
45:07
you have nothing left to prove. Thank you for tuning into this
45:10
custom deep dive. Keep reading, keep investigating
45:13
the source text, and we will catch you next time on Reformed
45:16
Thinking.