Paul, Poetry, and the Incarnation | Disruptive Presence 92

In which John and David discuss the unexpected connections between the Apostle Paul's eloquent Mars Hill sermon and the rich world of Greek poetry. Imagine finding the divine in places you'd never think to look! The episode meanders through this fascinating theological landscape, journeying from the familiar paths of scripture to the unexpected territories where God's presence defies boundaries.

We also explore the  layers of Paul's message, as it weaves through the paradox of the incarnation and turns our conventional theological constructs upside down. We are essentially peering into the heart of the New Testament's message about God's radical action against sin and brokenness. 

Episode 147 of the Two Texts Podcast | Disruptive Presence 92

If you want to get in touch about something in the podcast you can reach out on podcast@twotexts.com or by liking and following the Two Texts podcast on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. If you enjoy the podcast, we’d love it if you left a review or comment where you’re listening from – and if you really enjoyed it, why not share it with a friend?

Music by Woodford Music (c) 2021

________
Help us keep Two Texts free for everyone by becoming a supporter of the show 

John and David want to ensure that Two Texts always remains free content for everyone. We don't want to create a paywall or have premium content that would exclude others. 

However, Two Texts costs us around £60 per month (US$75; CAD$100) to make. If you'd like to support the show with even just a small monthly donation it would help ensure we can continue to produce the content that you love. 

Thank you so much.

Transcript

David: 0:05

Hi and welcome to the Two Texts podcast. I'm here with my co-host, john Andrews, and my name is David Harvey. This is a podcast of two friends from two different countries meeting every two weeks to talk about the Bible. Each week, we pick one text to talk about, which invariably leads us to talking about two texts and often many more. This season we're taking a long, slow journey through the book of Acts to explore how the first Christians encountered the disruptive presence of the Holy Spirit.

John: 0:39

So, david, we are still in this magnificent sermon of Paul, sometimes referred to the Mars Hill Sermon, referring to the Roman god, mars of War, but it's really on the Hill of Ares, which is the sort of Greek version of that god of war, the Areopagus, and we've got it going on there and we really just got very excited about the saturation of the biblical text and just really we didn't even get to the second part of Paul's sermon, this sort of opening barrage of Paul when he says oh, I found this inscription to an unknown God.

John: 1:19

You're still not sure who that is. I'm here to proclaim to you who this unknown God is, sure who that is. I'm here to proclaim to you who this unknown God is. And he just launches into this incredible, as it were, comment and continuous comments that are just saturated in biblical truth and that on the surface it looks like Paul is going a bit soft and yet actually he is as biblical as as he normally is. It's just the context he's in doesn't have that Bible worldview framework to make the to sort of connect the dots. But but what an exciting beginning we had together.

David: 1:58

It. It really was, and it continues to be, such a stunning piece of of text because it offers us just so much to like. I was really struck by, I think, where we ended that last episode. It's that notion that, in the subtleties of Paul's language, that this is the God that gives us all things Beautiful, which is classic Jewish monotheism. It's exactly what we should expect from Paul, like I've looked carefully at all the objects of your worship, but let me tell you about the God who gives us all things. Come on, and that sort of leads us into where we left. We're about to get to the end of the last episode, where you get this poetic text in him we live and move and have our being.

David: 2:46

I mean, this is fascinating, for my goodness. So many reasons, isn't it? Yeah, go for it.

John: 2:53

No, no, I was just going to say because obviously it's weird, those words I hope I'm not going to get hung, drawn and quartered here those words, when you first hear them, sound biblical, right, that sounds like something that's in the Bible, right here. Those words, when you first hear them, sound biblical, right, that sounds like something that's in the Bible, right. But of course he's literally quoting in terms of both quotes in him we move and have our being and then the sort of we are his offspring. He's quoting like two different Greek poets who are held very, very highly in the context of their world and I think we said last time that Paul wasn't necessarily affirming everything these poets believed. But in the same way that he seems to be using the altar of the unknown God as a springboard into the first conversation on the sermon about creation and God's order, etc. He seems to now be using these comments as not only a sort of a confirmation of what he's just said, but as a springboard to the next part of the sermon, or at least the summary of the sermon.

John: 3:59

We know this is not the whole sermon, or we don't think it is, um, yes, but but the sort of summary of that. And it's quite fascinating because the quotes that he quotes sound biblical but they're not. Yes, and and we had this little reflection that paul isn't adapting the biblical narrative to Greek poetry, but rather he is saying even elements of Greek poetry are agreeing with our worldview biblically, and that's really important. He's not slicing and dicing the gospel to fit, but rather he's connecting some wisdom from their world which seems to affirm his biblical worldview. And I think that's important differentiation, isn't it, david? That we don't get sucked into some sort of syncretistic, pluralistic type world there.

David: 4:54

I think that it's a longstanding biblical notion that God can be found elsewhere, that God can be found elsewhere, but it's still God that we find right. So I think that to me is I mean, there's real nuance in that. So do we think that God I mean? And these people turn up all over the place in scripture, these kind of God fearers? And if we pause long enough when reading this text, as we even have done, when we talk about the Ethiopian that we talked about multiple episodes ago, there's always this question of how did these people become God-fearers?

David: 5:38

There's this notion that Jesus meets his disciples at one point and it sounds like there is these other people proclaiming you and in never any context of how did these people figure this out? Right, and I think this is rooted in the theology of the Psalms, where, if God is and the Psalms that I think Paul's alluding to in this sermon God is everywhere. So it's not unlikely that some people will find the true God in surprising spaces. Right, and I'm trying to be very nuanced in what we say. Bear in mind, abraham is an example of this.

David: 6:10

You know what I mean that outside of the law he finds the true God. So we have to open ourselves to that possibility. Where did the three visitors to Abraham come from right?

David: 6:23

In that sort of sense. You know what I mean. There's different arguments about that, of course. Now then you think about the lineage of Jesus.

David: 6:30

We've talked about this on two texts before grafting in these people who are not Jewish into the story well before. So this notion that Paul now seems to be approaching is not saying, oh, therefore, if you just go worship over that God over there, that's the same thing, right, like Paul is not saying all gods are the same God. What he seems to be open to is that the true God can be found in surprising spaces sometimes and ultimately he will lead you to these true spaces. And we know notional stories in modern life of people Like I've heard stories. I have friends who have been in one religion and have met Jesus spiritually even in those sort of contexts, in those other religions, and that has led them to different types of spaces. So I'm being too complex on this.

David: 7:24

I think what I'm trying to say is that there's actually good biblical evidence that this is how these things work and if we take, oh, what Paul's saying here is all Greco-Roman poetry about God is now true. This would be to completely misappropriate what goes on in scripture and even what's happening in this exact passage, because I mean this poem, for want of a better term, it seems like it's first. It's Aratus is the sort of first person to use this poem, and it's a poem about Zeus. Now, it's quite fascinating, actually, because it's a poem about Zeus, which is actually working through the sort of main astronomical facts of the universe as they're known in that day, and so the poem's talking about what we would call creation.

David: 8:21

Yeah yeah, and it begins by paying homage to Zeus, about what we're about to talk about. So I can't help but notice that Paul, in his sermon, has talked about this is the God who made the world and everything in it, heaven and earth. And now that draws him up to now say, oh, that poem about Zeus is actually true if it's about God, and that's the stunning thing that we must make sure he doesn't say that poem about Zeus is true. He's making the point that that poem about Zeus is actually a poem about Jesus, and at which point then now it's just another piece of worship pointing to the right place. But maybe this is the way to say it. Were somebody to have rolled out John 1 in the beginning was the word and the word was with God, and said oh, yes, and therefore that poem is about Zeus now as well, I think Paul would have fought them in the street.

John: 9:21

Absolutely.

David: 9:23

It doesn't work both ways. And I think that's maybe the difference that you're wanting to keep us accurately and I agree in the right space of yeah.

John: 9:31

Is that fair to say? No, it's absolutely fair to say, and I think even in the context of Paul's sermon, with the very next expression, he does differentiate that. So you've almost got this little interlude. Very next expression he does differentiate that. So you've almost got this little interlude. He builds this first part of the sermon saturated in biblical nuance and text about God making the world, and he doesn't need temples built by human hands and he's not served by human hands and in fact all life has come from him and he's. Even though we're groping in the dark, he is not far from us. And then you've got this little interlude, for from him we live and move and have our being. As some of your own poets have said, we are his offspring. Now, if he left it there, we'd be very confused, but then we've got this gorgeous, therefore, verse 29, therefore, since we are God's offspring. So he's sort of using this quote from their poem not to fall back into the original meaning of that poem but to springboard the idea of we're his offspring to explain. Oh, by the way, let me introduce you to the God whose offspring we are.

John: 10:46

And I think Paul is doing that brilliantly.

John: 10:49

He's not allowing the biblical worldview to be sucked into a Greco-Roman worldview of how the world began, but rather he's saying even your own poets have identified some stuff that actually fits well with my argument.

John: 11:06

But then he drives the argument on and makes this sort of beautiful point and I love the point that he makes that we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone, an image made by human design and skill, again by human design and skill again. So again it's almost like the first part of the sermon is linked to the second part of the sermon through these poems. And I think it's a brilliant piece of work by Paul that he started the sermon by observing the unknown God stuff and then launches in, and then he, I suppose, in many ways puts a hook in the water by quoting their poets in order then to draw them into his sort of concluding part of the sermon. And again the danger is it's almost viewed as a compromise here. But Paul is compromising nothing In the light of we are his offspring that may now explain some stuff to you.

David: 12:05

Therefore, does that make sense in terms of how he's, I think, how he's using it, or oh, I think it makes perfect, perfect sense, and I was looking like I love how you say that the sermon turns on this quote and I almost wonder if this is how Paul's built the sermon. It's very. It's what you'd call a chiastic structure, where it kind of builds in it pivots at the middle.

David: 12:34

Most of the Psalms work this way and it might be worth. I mean, let me explain that a little better because not everybody will sort of immediately track what we mean by chiastic. But your classic Western way of explaining, telling story, of writing poetry, is it builds to the end and the significance is where it ends, whereas you find in a lot of ancient Near Eastern poetry they call it chiasm after the Greek letter X, because it sort of crosses over on itself. And a great example would be to look at some of the Psalms and notice that the main point of the psalm is often held in the very middle of the psalm. So I think about Psalm 22,. I think is a good example.

David: 13:16

The psalm begins my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? And the key point in that psalm is the turn in the middle where the psalmist makes a confess that, despite the fact that people are dividing my clothes up, they're mocking me, they're calling out names, the statement is made in the middle but you will not turn from your anointed one, come on. So the statement at the beginning looks like total abandonment. The statement at the end looks like okay, maybe God will do something in the future. But the key statement is the one in the middle, that I know that you will not turn from your anointed one right, which is and I think that's a helpful example of what happens in chiasm. So I think Paul seems to be doing the same thing here, with the pivot being this moment of Greek poetry. But if you actually look at the poem I mean, let me just give you a couple of lines from it so it begins like this from Zeus, let us begin right. So there in itself is a statement Him from it. So it begins like this from Zeus, let us begin right. So there in itself is a statement Him. I'm reading quite an old translation here, so forgive me Him do we mortals never leave unnamed, right? So even that's interesting, right.

David: 14:20

So this opening statement is we can't not name this, but we have an unknown God statue. Full of Zeus are all the streets and all the marketplaces of men, full is the sea and the haven thereof. Always we have need of zeus, for we are his offspring, and he, and his kindness unto men, gives favorable signs and wakens the people to work, reminding them their labor, and he then goes on to say that he provides the soil for the ox. He provides the seasons for the trees. He provides the soil for the ox, he provides the seasons for the trees. He provides the the soil for the seeds. He sets the signs in the heavens, marks out the constellations and for the year devise what stars should, should, guide us right. So then it says this wherefore him do men ever worship, first and last hail, oh father, mighty marvel, mighty blessing unto all men.

David: 15:12

Now, I don't think you can read that as a Christian reader, as a Jewish reader, and not hear the contrast and the competition that this brings to our notion of the God that is revealed to us through Abraham, isaac, moses, jesus and the prophets. So, but it strikes. Here's the thing that I noticed the Zeus poem says he is the sustainer of all things and above us right, which of course, paul wants to exclusively hold these things for the God of his scriptures. So it strikes me as really interesting that his response, once he's so, he builds to it there's this God. He says there's this God and and he is over all, he creates all things, holds all things.

David: 15:55

I think people hear that challenge to Zeus in this and then he says in fact, your own poets have said it in him we live and move and have our being. But notice, since we are God's offspring, we ought not to think that deity is like gold or silver or stone. Think that deity is like gold or silver or stone. So to me, what strikes me is the ironic is aratus. His poem talks about the fact that zeus cannot be contained. And here paul stood in a city where that's exactly what they're trying to do, which at some level therefore disqualifies zeus from the things which are said about him. Yes, excuse me if, if that makes sense, that actually you have done exactly the thing that your poets tell you not to do. So Paul's response is I'm going to steal what you've said about your poets and now point it towards God, for whom it is true, because you cannot create an idol of this God. I mean, maybe I'm laboring the point too hard, but I think that I think there's something really cool and clever actually going on in here.

John: 16:54

No, it's superb. It's superb and I think hearing, I mean, as you just read the poem to Zeus, you go, wow, you could hear so many biblical references that actually we could go to scriptures that literally talk about Yahweh, talk about Jesus, creator of heaven and earth, sustainer of the universe. I mean, even in Paul's own boundary he talks about God marking out appointed times in history and boundaries of their lands. I mean, this is almost as if Paul has this poem in mind the whole way through this sermon and he is playing off it, he's riffing off it in some ways and brilliantly introducing biblical ideas around this. So I think you making that poem explicit for us is a bit of a game changing moment in an understanding to this. And I think doesn't it show us again, like we've often said at a two-text level, that when you hear, for example, a scripture, quoting scripture, always go back to the original scripture being quoted, that intertextuality sort of stuff where we're going oh, jesus makes an allusion to Deuteronomy, let's go back to Deuteronomy. Jesus quotes Hosea, let's go back to Hosea. And then suddenly we found we're not just going back to Moses and Deuteronomy and Hosea, but that creates its own threads throughout the Tanakh and you've got all of these threads starting to run.

John: 18:26

What you've just done there brilliantly is by putting this poem of Aratus about Zeus almost side by side to Paul's sermon. You can go, wow, look what Paul might be doing. Paul might be actually cleverly using this idea, but actually he's interjecting biblical truth into this conversation to the point where he's about to make a very strong appeal around this. And this is where it gets a bit interesting and edgy. So up to this point there's no sort of reaction.

John: 19:06

But you can see then, paul isn't just brilliantly quoting the Bible, but he's actually brilliantly critiquing a key piece of poetry to do with Zeus himself. It's potentially so brilliant but, of course, easily lost if we don't know the illusion that Paul may in fact be quoting. It's a bit like when we've quoted bits of the New Testament and me and you have suddenly run off to the Book of Psalms, or we've run off to Deuteronomy, or we've run off to Genesis, or Galatians, or Galatians yes, absolutely. And of course suddenly we're realizing, oh, hold on a minute. And this potentially, this understanding of this poem, does potentially revolutionize the genius of what Paul is trying to achieve in the context of his sermon at the Arapicus. So you're getting this sort of brilliant piece of contextualization, I think.

David: 20:05

That's exactly what I felt when I was looking at it. I think that's exactly what Paul is doing here. He either knows this, maybe it's so famous that he's heard it growing up, or maybe he's just heard it while in Athens and thought I know what to do with that. I want to sort of critique that, and that's why I love this sense that his critique is. So if that's what you think, how has it led you to just build all these idols? Which goes back to something we said in the last episode, which is really quite important that this doesn't sound like Paul as we've heard him preach elsewhere in Acts.

David: 20:43

But when you realize that actually the sermon is a critique of idolatry at this point I mean which is fundamentally Jewish, it's absolutely what you would expect from someone like Paul, that when it hits the crescendo moment, we are his offspring. His point at this thing is so how can you, in gold, silver or stone and with human imagination, think that you can contain that God? That's brilliant. But now hold this for a second, because I think this is really fun An image formed by the art and imagination of mortals, right. So that's his critique. But notice this. Then he goes God's overlooked this ignorance. Yes, he now commands people to repent because he has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a human, and I think that's I love that sense of the image of God by a man actually.

David: 21:47

So not just obviously it's a Jesus reference, but but this image of God is ultimately I'm not. I'm struggling. This is why there are times where people say we love that we don't script two texts, and there are times where I think I should script this so I didn't sound like such a bumbling fool on the recording. But but there's something gorgeous about Paul's amongst idols which are invariably human, shaped right, carved out of gold and silver and stone to the best of our imagination. And then the real stunning notion is that when we actually see God, when we actually reject idols, what we get in his place is not anything in his place, it's him himself and he's a man, he's jesus. I mean help me out if I'm not making sense but there's this contrast of of. You're not left with nothing, you're actually left with an absolute representation of god in, in, in christ. Does that make sense?

John: 22:49

it does it, it does. I think it's absolutely beautiful and even I noticed, just in a fresh way, as you were saying that, where it says for he has said today, he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed, and that carries on in almost an echo of the first part of the sermon, where the same God has appointed times in history, set boundaries for lands. So this incredible architect, creator, god, is now introduced as this redemptive God by appointing, by putting this man in play, by putting this man in place. There's a beautiful, again, symmetry in elements of the first part of the sermon, or the summary of the sermon, and that second part, and again you've got this gorgeous play on the idea of the unknown is now being known and the invisible that you've made visible through idols and imagery. Actually, now god has made this person visible, god has revealed him in this man and, and so this is not now this man appointed, is not an image made by men, but an, but a person appointed by god. So you do get this lovely shift that up to this point we've been talking about humans making idols, humans shaping god, humans in play. You.

John: 24:17

You summarize the porn just beautifully by saying well, look, even even the poem about zeus talks about zeus not being contained, and yet you've contained him. Why are you doing this? This is a really stupid idea and in all most Paul says but actually, the God of heaven has appointed a person, has appointed someone not made by human hand, but a man appointed by God himself. And I think there's this gorgeous, beautiful idea that the man he's now introducing is the God man, is the man shaped and appointed by God himself and not a man shaped in a normal human way, if that also makes sense yes, so I mean, I think I quoted Maggie Ross in the last podcast, but let me read you this from her as well, because I think it's stunning.

David: 25:11

She says this she's the scandal of the incarnation, so the scandal of God becoming flesh. The scandal of the incarnation is not that we are naked before Emmanuel, god with us, but that God is naked before us and, in utter silence, given over to our hands and hearts. Wow, wow, I mean it's great. I'm going to read hands and hearts, wow, wow, I mean it's great. I'm going to read it again, because it's that good, I almost said that.

John: 25:37

Read that again, david.

David: 25:38

That's amazing. The scandal of the incarnation is not that we are naked before Emmanuel, god with us, but God is naked before us and, in utter silence, given over to our hands and hearts. Wow.

John: 25:54

Okay, I just need a minute.

David: 25:57

If you could write one sentence in your life like that, right, wow, so good. It comes to me because there's layers upon layers of irony here. Here's a poem about a God who is bigger than everything, and Paul's critique of them is you say that in him we live and move and have our being, and yet now you're trying to contain him in gold, silver and stone and something of your imagination. And then he says but let me tell you I mean, I'm ad-libbing here a little bit but let me tell you what god is actually like and the great, amazing revelation of the god who made the heavens and hung the stars and divided the seas from the from the land, is this man, jesus? So there's the critique. Is you're trying to contain? But? But think about, here's the beautiful thing You're trying to contain your God in something that you have imagined. Indeed, but actually our God is contained in something that God has imagined.

John: 26:58

Come on, and that's the human I mean. It's stunning, isn't it?

David: 27:05

And you can't help but think, then, of Ephesians 3, 20, the more than we could even imagine. And we always think, oh, if God can do even more than we can imagine. And we always think of big, vast, zeus type things. But it's as if Paul's actually saying to him no, no, no, no, no. The thing you can't imagine is that God is Jesus and he was born in a manger and we crucified him and God raised him from the dead. I mean, it's heavy theology, isn't it? It's fantastic.

John: 27:38

I mean, seriously, I'm a bit lost. Yeah, it's absolutely. I mean, that's just an outstanding summary, David. I'm quite overwhelmed and emotional because I think, my goodness, when we have taken the time to think about what Paul may actually be doing, here you go.

John: 28:00

Wow, that is a phenomenal understanding of the scriptures, a phenomenal understanding of a Greek understanding of the world, and without compromising a biblical understanding of the world, he is just excuse the pun he has undressed.

John: 28:21

He has completely demonstrated how empty this Greek worldview is.

John: 28:28

Without ever like bashing them and making them being superior or speaking down to them or being arrogant, he is simply, in the most masterful way, constructed an argument which leads to a magnificent and controversial conclusion.

John: 28:48

Cause, cause not only is this God man, this unimagined idea, presented, but this man is proved to be the God-man because he was raised from the dead. So it's just an amazing argument that Paul is making, that even this ultimate boundary that humans have to surrender to this, these ultimate expression of time and season, the ultimate expression of human mortality and limitation, is broken by this God man, by this God appointed man, by raising him from the dead and even the way he uses resurrection. I think in my own thinking that's changed slightly because of our conversation here. He's not just stating the fact oh, by the way, we believe in the resurrection he's actually saying, no, the God appointed man has broken the ultimate barrier and boundary of human mortality that was previously in the realm of the gods and now is among us, is, is actually demonstrated to us and you're going oh, wow, okay, that's a slightly, or a very different way of thinking about how paul has concluded the sermon than I may have thought about previously.

David: 30:10

To be quite honest with you, yeah, I love that, I love that Wow, and and I want I want to make a point that I think we shouldn't just drift over as well in this related to this just immenseness of what Paul sees is done in Jesus and I think some of our reading strategies across the years make this easy for us to miss.

David: 30:32

But because he has fixed a day on which he will have the world judged in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead, I want to tentatively suggest, tentatively, cautiously. I think when a lot of us hear this, we envisage God the judge planning something profoundly terrifying in the future. But just notice Paul's strategy there was a day fixed to judge the world in righteousness, and then the resurrection, and then he raised him from the dead. I think this is an allusion to the cross and I think that actually one of the almost reading strategies that I'd encourage people to see is that when we think of God as judge, the image we draw is often courtroom judge you're going away for a very long time, is often courtroom judge you're going away for a very long time. Paul's image of judge is Jesus on the cross.

David: 31:34

So good, and so because, again, remember we say this all the time God is not as you expect, he's not an idol, he's a man. And we now know that a man sounds worse than an idol made of gold. But now we realize, oh no, it's better. And we've got to be careful of constantly importing our expectations of God, our pagan expectations of God, onto God. And the one thing that, theologically, is abundantly clear in the New Testament is that God has acted decisively against the brokenness and sin of the world in the cross. But we're sometimes resistant to see that that is God's judgment. What is his judgment and you think about this as Pauline what is his judgment? That Christ was coming into the world right. So, when it actually came down to it, god the judge made a call and he absorbed all of the judgment onto himself, right and drew it into himself and then proved his righteousness in that and assurance of that by then raising Jesus from the dead.

John: 32:32

It makes total sense, total brilliant sense, at two levels. Number one it fits with the flow of the sermon, so the idea of judgment being introduced before resurrection that doesn't sort of make sense.

John: 32:45

So there's a lovely set. Well, what do we mean by judgment there? Well, if the judgment is seen as the cross, that makes total chronological sense in the argument, because he concludes with resurrection, yes. And secondly, it makes total sense in that Paul is clearly continuing with the pattern that he's used all through the book of Acts where he has talked about the death and resurrection of Jesus, because one of the great criticisms has been of the Mars Hill sermon is that he doesn't talk about the cross. But if the cross here is being alluded to in the judgment of God, in terms of this righteous act to judge the world, then actually this is Paul alluding to the cross and the resurrection. And now we have incarnation, cross and resurrection. This is essentially the message that we hear all the way through the book of Acts and Paul has not suddenly lost his bearings theologically.

David: 33:48

Yes, lost his bearings.

John: 33:50

Theologically, yes, but he's just doing it in a brilliantly intelligent way that if we follow the breadcrumbs it leads us to one conclusion within that. So I think that observation is superb, David, and I think for a lot of our listeners that will definitely connect some dots that may have been slightly out of sync or out of alignment or maybe even creating confusion within that sermon, Whereas the cross, well, the cross is in verse 31, the cross and the resurrection in verse 31. And you've got incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection all contained in one superb statement in verse 31.

David: 34:36

Yeah, and I think and hopefully then also a reading strategy for all of those notions that what we see in the cross is how God judges the world. What we see in the cross is how God defeats sin. Death is defeated by death, Judgment is defeated by well. Our unrighteousness is defeated by his righteousness. Like these, yeah, I mean these are.

David: 35:01

There's a gorgeous story, I think it's Philip Yancey that tells a story about a famous New York judge during the depression used to because he suffered from a bit of insomnia used to go and serve at the nighttime courts. Right, yeah, and these courts were, were were not dealing with cases suitable to his prestige and his steaming abilities, but he used to do it because it was better than doing nothing and sitting at home awake. And so one night he's in court and a lady has has robbed bread from a bakery and he basically he asked the lady like what's going on here? And she's like I just don't have money to feed my children, so I stole this bread. And so the judge says to the woman this is a gorgeous story.

David: 35:47

The judge says to the woman well, you've stolen the bread and that's wrong, so I'm fining you five for the theft.

David: 35:55

And so the lady starts to cry and because obviously she doesn't have the five dollars.

David: 35:59

But then the judge opens his pocket, pulls out his wallet and hands five dollars to the court clerk and says but I'm paying the fine on the behalf of the lady, right?

David: 36:11

And everybody in the court, everybody in the court starts kind of like making some noise about that and he immediately issues fines of 50 cents to everybody in the gallery and he fines them for being the type of people that would let, that would live in a city, that lets somebody be in such a difficult situation that they needed to steal bread, yes, and then he gives the fines to the lady and off she goes, and I think it's Yancey that tells the story about. This is the complexity of, and also the simple beauty of the story of God that in one sense there is a judgment that's needed and he will be righteous to the judgment, but then at the other sense, he'll then draw all of that judgment into himself and you think, will not the God of the world do what is right? But yes, the answer is. But he'll surprise us profoundly in how he actually goes about doing that.

John: 37:10

So beautiful, so beautiful, absolutely beautiful.

John: 37:13

And isn't it just a magnificent thinking about the context of Athens, the idolatry, the trust in things made by human hands, the activity, energy, endeavour of humans to somehow find a way to healing, wholeness and justification through their own efforts.

John: 37:41

And here in this man, actually, all of that has been done on your behalf, that there's no amount of striving or work that we can do, but it has already been done. That God has judged, as it were, all that needs to be judged in Christ Jesus and that Jesus has risen from the dead and that because of that has risen from the dead and that because of that, men can know the unknown god and can see the one who is invisible. And above all and I, I love, I love the beauty of that idea and how paul is trying to draw them away from their intellectual superiority into a hum that says but God has done this, and he has done it for you, and he's done it because he's the God who is near you, and that's magnificent. It's just I'm quite overwhelmed by that sort of conclusion. Absolutely beautiful stuff.

David: 38:44

So that's it for this episode. We know that there's always more to explore and we encourage you to dive into the text and do that. Thank you. Support the show? Visit 2textscom. But that is all for now. So until next time from John and I. Goodbye.