The Verb διαλεγομαι
In Acts, Luke frequently uses the verb διαλεγομαι to describe how Paul presented truth. Our English verb “dialog” is derived from this verb, and this etymological correspondence sometimes suggests that we ought to understand it in the sense of “debate” or “dispute.” Indeed, older translations often render it in this way:

Act 17:17 Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.

Act 19:8 And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.

But the word often appears in contexts where no debate is in view. It really refers to a carefully reasoned presentation. One example is Paul’s long sermon in Troas, which (to judge by Eutychus’ response, was anything but a stirring debate):

Act 20:7, 9 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached διαλεγομαι unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. … 9 And there sat in a window a certain young man named Eutychus, being fallen into a deep sleep: and as Paul was long preaching διαλεγομαι, he sunk down with sleep, and fell down from the third loft, and was taken up dead.

Another is his presentation to Felix, the Roman procurator:

Act 24:25 And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will call for thee.

There is no justification for translating διαλεγομαι as “dispute” or “debate” in any case where it describes Paul’s conduct. Paul presented the Scriptures in a rational, logical way, but references to his conduct as διαλεγομαι offer no support for the notion that he engaged anybody in a combative way.
The Verb συζητεω
This is not to say that Paul never debated contentiously with anybody. Luke does record one such argument, early in Paul’s Christian life, when he first returned to Jerusalem after his conversion on the road to Damascus. This account uses a different verb from the other descriptions of Paul’s interactions with the Jews.

Act 9:29 And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed συζητεω against the Grecians:

συζητεω definitely does describe a spirited debate. In the gospels (especially Mark), it often describes conversations in which our Lord is engaged:

Mark 8:11 And the Pharisees came forth, and began to question with him, seeking of him a sign from heaven, tempting him.

Mark 9:14 And when he came to his disciples, he saw a great multitude about them, and the scribes questioning with them.

Mark 9:16 And he asked the scribes, What question ye with them?

In each of these cases, the verb describes an adversarial engagement initiated by the Jews. The same observation applies to Mark 12:28, which describes the conversation initiated a few verses earlier:

Mar 12:13, 28 And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words. … 28 And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all?

The Jews are using the same tactic, described with the same verb, against the believers in the early chapters of Acts.

Acts 6:9 Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen.

The strategy of a combative discussion in which each party tries to trip up or discredit the other is common among unbelievers. The unbelieving Jews often used it against the Lord and his followers. Before his conversion, Paul would have been sympathetic with this approach. As a rabbinical student he would have been skilled in debate. As a new believer, he would naturally turn to this tool to spread the gospel. The first time he comes to Jerusalem as a Christian, he proceeds to fight fire with fire:

Acts 9:29 And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians:

What was the outcome of these engagements? Let’s continue to read.

Act 9:29-31 And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him. 30 Which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus. 31 Then had the churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied.

Paul’s combative spirit naturally stirs up the worse possible response among his opponents. They seek to kill him, and in the process no doubt intensify their persecution of the rest of the church. The believers urge Paul to return home to Tarsus. He leaves, and immediately the climate in Jerusalem changes. The churches have rest, are edified, walk in the fear of the Lord, and see many converts. Luke’s commentary in v. 31 suggests that Paul’s debates shed more heat than light, and the Spirit’s work prospered only when the church stopped trying to use unbelieving tactics against the unbelievers.

Compare the chronological setting of Paul’s use of debate in Acts 9:29, and his prohibition of such tactics in 2 Tim 2:24. As a young believer, he loved to debate. As a mature Christian, he forbids it. This contrast agrees with his characterization of the immature believer in 1 Cor 3. In the context, Paul is describing the stages of spiritual life, starting with the unbeliever (the natural man, 1 Cor 2:14). The mature believer is the spiritual man (2:15), who combines thorough knowledge of God’s ways (“he … judgeth all things”) with godly conduct (“he himself is judged of no man”). But we do not pass immediately from unbelief to spirituality. Paul describes the new believer as a “babe in Christ,” and outlines his characteristics:

1Co 3:1-3 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. 3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?

The “babe in Christ,” the “carnal” believer, is marked with “envying, and strife, and divisions.” Perhaps Paul here is recalling his own experience as a “babe in Christ,” when he sought to use worldly techniques of strife to spread the gospel. By the time he writes Corinthians, he recognizes that these techniques are a mark of immaturity, not of spirituality, and by the end of his life he urges Timothy to forsake them. That’s good advice for us, as well.

Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.

Doesn’t this exhortation imply that we should boldly confront those who teach error?

Jude 1:3 is the only instance of the Greek word translated “contend” (επαγωνιζομαι) in the Greek Bible. The word does describe a struggle, but Jude does not identify the adversary with whom one struggles.

The simple form of the verb, αγωνιζομαι, does occur frequently in the NT. Elsewhere in Greek literature it often describes a wrestling between two human adversaries, as in an athletic competition (compare 1 Cor 9:25, where Paul compares himself with an athlete). Our Lord uses it in this sense, but only to explain to Pilate that this is not to be the practice of his followers:

Joh 18:36 Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

In other NT references, the verb describes strenuous exertion, without any sense of conflict between people:

• Lk. 13:24 “strive to enter in at the strait gate”
• Col. 1:29 “I also labor, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily”
• Col 4:12 “laboring fervently for you in prayers”
• 1 Tim. 6:12 “fight the good fight of faith”
• 2 Tim. 4:7 “I have fought a good fight”

We are indeed in a conflict, but not with other people, as Paul teaches the Ephesians:

Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

We can expect to exert every bit of our energy in this spiritual combat. Jude is right: we must struggle for the faith. And there is an adversary: we wrestle against the forces of evil. But this does not justify using the world’s methods, or viewing people as our adversaries. In fact, Paul reminds the Corinthians,

2Co 10:3-4 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: 4 For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;

Epaphroditus in Col 4:12 gives us a good example of wielding these weapons, “laboring fervently … in prayers.”

Jude tells us of our attitude and duty toward evil. Paul’s exhortation in 2 Tim 2:24 concerns the people whom we engage. We are to hate evil, but treat people, even those who are ensnared by the devil, in a spirit of humility, patience, and gentleness, not one of combat.

A lively debate seems a natural way of engaging people’s attention. The entire sports industry is based on the natural attraction of a good fight between skilled adversaries. Isn’t it wonderful that we can take advantage of this inborn interest to draw attention to the truth of God’s word?

Or is it? Just because something seems natural doesn’t make it right. Our natural state is dead in trespasses and sins, and many of our instincts require revision by the Spirit as we grow in Christ. Some exhortations in Scripture suggest that believers ought to be more cautious about engaging in, or promoting, staged controversies on spiritual subjects.

The most direct instruction about contentious modes of presenting truth comes from Paul at the end of his life, as he is awaiting execution during his second captivity in Rome:

2Ti 2:24-26 And the servant of the Lord must not strive μαχομαι; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; 26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

In instructing Timothy concerning his role in spreading the gospel, Paul invokes the image of “the servant of the Lord” from Isaiah 53, who was noted for his patience and meekness in the face of unjust accusation. (Peter draws the same conclusion from Isaiah 53 in 1 Pet 2:21-25; see my exposition of Isa 53:7-9, mp3 or notes.) Following our Lord’s example, we must not be combative. Our presentation of the truth is to be marked by gentleness, patience, and meekness, recognizing that true, redeeming changes in people’s beliefs are the work of God, not the result of our cleverness.

Earlier, before his first captivity, Paul emphasized the non-polemical nature of his ministry in his farewell to the elders at Ephesus:

Act 20:18-19 Ye know, from the first day that I came into Asia, after what manner I have been with you at all seasons, 19 Serving the Lord with all humility of mind, and with many tears, and temptations, which befell me by the lying in wait of the Jews:

And James, in condemning the “envy and strife” of the worldly wisdom, describes the wisdom that God gives thus:

Jam 3:1 17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.

James does not excuse error: godly wisdom is “first pure.” But the need for purity does not justify a combative spirit in presenting it.

As one contemplates these exhortations, some objections come to mind. These include Jude’s exhortation to “contend for the faith,” Paul’s “disputings” with the Jews throughout his ministry, and clear cases of confrontation (as when Paul rebukes Elymas the sorcer). I’ll consider these in upcoming posts. When all is said and done, I hope that you will join me in shaping your ministry of God’s word in the light of Paul’s exhortation in 2 Tim 2.

Both English terms translating a participle of the Greek verb υγιαινω):

1 Tim 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine ;

1 Tim 6:3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

2 Tim 1:13 Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

Tit 1:9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

Tit 2:1 But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:

The verb means literally “to be healthy,” and the phrase is commonly understood to indicate that the teaching in question is orthodox, free from error, rather than “sick” and corrupt. It certainly is important for teachers to present the Scriptures accurately and not present error. But in light of what we have seen about the parallels between teaching and feeding the flock, there may be a deeper meaning.

The participle “sound” υγιαινων comes from the verb meaning “be healthy,” so the phrase is similar to our phrase “health food.” This modern expression means, not food that is itself intrinsically healthy, but rather food that brings health. In the same way, “healthy doctrine” would deserve the name because it yields health in the hearer.

This meaning is consistent with how Paul talks about teaching of which he disapproves, in the same letters.

2Ti 2:16-17 But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. 17 And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus;

1Ti 6:4-5 doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness:

The verses in 1 Tim 6 immediately follow v. 3, which speaks of “healthy words” (translated “wholesome words” in the AV). Paul rejects the contrasting form of doctrine, not just because its contents are false, but because of the spiritual damage it does to the hearers.

Of course, the two expressions are not mutually exclusive. One important reason for staying away from spoiled food (“unhealthy food”) is that it can make the eater sick. Plants and animals that are healthy yield food that helps make us healthy; eating meat from sick animals or vegetables from rotten plants can make us ill. Similarly, doctrine that is true to God’s revelation (the more common understanding of “sound doctrine”) is most likely to engender spiritual health in its hearers, and doctrine that teaches spiritual lies is dangerous, not just because it perverts the revelation of God, but because of its impact on the lives of those who consume it.

The idea that “healthy teaching” includes the idea of the teaching’s effect on the hearer can be found in the Old Testament, and is consistent with the use of the expression in other Greek literature of the first century.

Υγιαινω “to be healthy” does not appear in the LXX, though the related verb υγιαζω “to heal” does appear, as a common translation for the Hebrew verb רפא . רפא also occurs (though translated by derivatives of ιαομαι) in reference to speech, and when it does, it always has the sense of “healing words,” words that bring health.

Pro 15:4 A wholesome tongue is a tree of life: but perverseness therein is a breach in the spirit.

Pro 12:18 There is that speaketh like the piercings of a sword: but the tongue of the wise is health.

Pro 16:24 Pleasant words are as an honeycomb, sweet to the soul, and health to the bones.

Methodologically, the instances of the expression in the Bible are sufficient to establish its meaning, but it is interesting to note that this meaning is consistent with how it is used in other Greek contemporary with the New Testament. The application of “sound” to “words” to indicate their effect (and not just their own condition) is clearly illustrated in the writings of Philo of Alexandria, a Greek-speaking Jewish writer born in 20 BC and active until AD 50. In his book “About Planting” (De Plantatione 1:114), he derives allegorical lessons from Moses’ instruction that fruit from trees in Canaan could not be eaten for three years after the conquest (Lev 19:23), comparing fruit with teaching. He says:

But the fruit which is not purified shall not be eaten; inasmuch as virtuous [αστειος “urban, cultured, civilized”] words λογοι, duly purified and healthful υγιαινοντες, nourish the soul, and give vigor to the mind; but the opposite kinds are not nutritious, but bring disease and destruction on the soul.

The Holy Spirit gives each believer a gift with which to function in the body. One of these gifts is that of teacher (Rom 12:6-7; 1 Cor 12:28). Paul links the title of “teacher” with another that is relevant to the food metaphor:

Eph 4:11-12 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:

The word “pastors” is a Greek word (ποιμην) that means, literally, “shepherds.” The corresponding verb ποιμανω is used twice to describe the responsibility of elders in the church:

Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

1Pe 5:1-3 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: 2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; 3 Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.

It’s interesting that the KJV translates the verb in both these places as “feed.” The verb does have a broader reference, including guiding the flock, and modern translations usually render it as “shepherd” or “care for.” However, the emphasis on the feeding responsibility is appropriate, in view of our metaphor, for the teaching responsibility of the elder.

It’s also more consistent with the use of the term in the LXX. Ποιμαινω is both the dominant translation (the most common one) and dedicated (used more for this Hebrew word than for any other) for the Hebrew root רעה that means “to shepherd” (not to be confused with the distinct roots, using the same radicals, for “evil” and “friend”). Used intransitively, this root describes what sheep do in the field. In this sense, we would translate it “to graze.” So the natural transitive meaning would be “to feed, to lead to grazing,” which is how the KJV understands it in contexts dealing with elders.

This usage suggests something important about how elders should teach. Sometimes a shepherd needs to give a bottle to a little lamb, but most of the time he feeds the flock by leading them to good pasture, showing them where the rich forage is, and removing noxious plants that they might encounter. In the same way, those who feed the flock of God should not just present spiritual conclusions, but show people how they can themselves engage with the word of God. The primary task of the pastor as teacher is not giving the flock spiritual conclusions, but showing the sheep how they can feed themselves from the word of God.

This topic is too large for a single post. In this one, we’ll look at summarize passages where the Bible calls itself food. Later posts will discuss  the “shepherd” vocabulary that describes teachers in assemblies of the saints, how this metaphor explains the meaning of the phrase  “sound doctrine,” and  the “spiritual physiology” by which spiritual food leads to spiritual growth.

Both the Old Testament and the New Testament describe the word of God as food.

OT Instances

Passages in the Old Testament use this metaphor to emphasize two characteristics of the word of God.

First, it is necessary for nourishment, and its absence has consequences as serious as famine:

Amo 8:11 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord GOD, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the LORD:

Job 23:12 (“I have esteemed the words of his mouth more than my necessary food”) is probably another instance of the same metaphor, though the word translated “necessary food” can be understood in other ways as well.

Second, it is pleasant to the taste:

Psa 19:7-10 the law of the Lord … the testimony of the Lord … the statutes of the Lord … the commandment of the Lord … the fear of the Lord … the judgments of the Lord … [are] sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb.

Psa 119:103 How sweet are thy words unto my taste! yea, sweeter than honey to my mouth!

Jer 15:16 Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.

NT Instances

The New Testament develops this word-picture further. It teaches that the Word of God enables the believer to grow:

1Pe 2:2 As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby:

Scripture as food comes in different forms, appropriate to different levels of maturity:

1Co 3:1-2 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.

This last passage emphasizes the role of the teacher in providing the believer with the right level of food. We see this same responsibility in Hebrews:

Heb 5:11-14 Of whom [Melchizedek, mentioned in Gen 14:18] we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing. 12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. 14 But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

The Big Idea

This metaphor emphasizes a distinctive purpose of Bible teaching. Secular teaching of a subject emphasizes the communication of content: we learn the elements and types of bonds in chemistry class, vocabulary and grammar in Greek class, and how to integrate a transcendental function in calculus class. Viewed as law, as precept, and as counsel, there is much in the Bible that teachers should seek to communicate and students should seek to remember, but the food metaphor emphasizes that our engagement with the Word of God goes beyond what we remember in our minds. The most important response to a meal is not to be able to remember the menu a year later. It is to be nourished, to grow, to derive strength and maintain health. Whenever we meditate on the word of God, either privately or by interacting with someone else, we are nourished spiritually. It is a source of strength, comfort, and guidance in our immediate situation. This kind of benefit takes place whenever the believer interacts with the word of God under the direction of the Spirit. What is retained is not just a head knowledge of the Scriptures, but the health of the spiritual organism–both the individual, and (when we interact corporately with the Word) the body of Christ. I don’t remember what I ate for supper a year ago today, but if I hadn’t taken that meal (and thousands of others over the past years), I wouldn’t be enjoying good health today.

How is your spiritual diet? Have you eaten your Bible today?

The central passage for this distinction is in John’s first epistle. In Chapter 2, vv. 12-14, he distinguishes three groups among his readers: little children, young men, and fathers. No doubt there were people of many ages among them, but the things he says of these groups seem to concern spiritual maturity more than physical age. Among the evangelist, John is the one who is most preoccupied with birth as a metaphor for salvation (John 1:12-13; 3:3-7). In these verses, he follows the development of the new life in Christ through childhood, robust youth, and gray-haired maturity. Other NT writers distinguish “babes in Christ” from those who are “of full age” (Heb 5:13-14; cf. 1 Cor 3:1; 14:20), and John’s language simply expands this description from two stages to three.

Let’s note what he writes about each stage of the Christian life. He actually goes over the list twice, changing the order slightly each time. In the table below, I’ve reordered the verses so that both lists come in the same order, to facilitate comparison.

Let’s consider these three groups in order.

The little children are described in two different ways in vv. 12 and 13c. In v. 12, we learn that their sins are forgiven. Here is a clear description of a new believer, one newly born again. In v. 13c he describes the same group by saying that they have known the Father. Apparently, to have one’s sin forgiven is to know the Father. We can understand this dynamic if we meditate on Isa 59:1-2:

1 Behold, the LORD’S hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: 2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.

Sin cuts us off from God. When we are born again, our sin is gone, and with it the separation from God. The youngest believer has access to the Father in prayer, and can draw near to him in fellowship. In fact, Paul uses the phrase “have not the knowledge of God” to describe an unbeliever (1 Cor 15:34).

John goes on to describe the young men. They were once little children, and they enjoy the forgiveness of sin and the knowledge of the Father that the little children enjoy, but something further is true of them. The basic characteristic of a one who is spiritually a young man is victory over the adversary: “ye have overcome the wicked one.” Little children may stumble and experience spiritual defeat from time to time, just as a physical infant stumbles many times in learning to walk. The young men have matured to the point that God’s Spirit gives them victory.

In describing the little children, John completely changed the metaphor between the two statements. In describing the young men, he retains the initial description when he addresses them the second time, but expands it. They have overcome the wicked one because they “are strong, and the word of God abides” in them. They know the Bible, the sword off the Spirit, and as a result they prevail in spiritual conflict.

What would you call someone who has a thorough, practical knowledge of the Bible, and as a result is able to overcome Satan? I suspect most of us would think of such a believer as quite mature. But in John’s terms, this is only the midpoint of spiritual growth. There remains one final stage, the spiritual counterpart of one who in physical life has become a father.

Of course, the fathers have their sins forgiven, and their lives are characterized by spiritual victory. But there is something more: they “have known him that is from the beginning.” John uses this phrase to describe the Lord Jesus. In his gospel, he describes the Savior as the “word” that was “in the beginning” (John 1:1), and he begins this epistle by describing the Savior’s life as “that which was from the beginning” (1 John 1:1). The little children know the Father. But knowing the Son is an attainment of mature believers.

We can gain some appreciation of what it means to know the Son by considering two other passages in the NT that speak of this relationship.

Peter closes his first epistle (2 Pet 3:18) by praying that his readers might “grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” He agrees with John that knowing the Lord Jesus is not accomplished in the moment of salvation, but is the result of an ongoing process throughout the believer’s life.

Paul also bears witness to this progression. His epistle to the Philippians is written during his first Roman imprisonment, which begins at the end of Acts. By the time he writes this letter, most of his ministry lies in the past. He has executed the three missionary journeys that Luke records. He has been the Lord’s channel for most of the epistles that bear his name. Yet, looking back on his life and ministry, he writes,

Phi 3:7-12 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. 8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ, 9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: 10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death; 11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. 12 Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus.

Paul states the objective of his life in these words: “that I may know him.” He does not consider himself to have laid hold fully on this knowledge, even after so many years as a believer and servant of the Lord. For him, as for John, it lies at the pinnacle of Christian experience.

John’s exposition has the priority right. The first and most important thing is to know God by having one’s sins forgiven. We must all start there.

Spiritual babies, like physical ones, can seem pretty disappointing at times. It takes time, discipline, and nourishment to move from childhood to robust youth, the era of spiritual growth in which, through the knowledge of God’s word, we regularly experience victory over the wicked one. It is right that we encourage young believers to study the Scriptures and develop habits of holiness. And it is very rewarding to see them grow and become victorious over the wicked one. But we all need to recognize that the ultimate goal is not victory. It is an intimate knowledge of the Son of God as we become like him.

—–

An attentive reader may wonder whether Col 1:10 might not challenge the idea that knowing God is something that the youngest believer enjoys.

Col 1:10 That ye might walk worthy of the Lord unto all pleasing, being fruitful in every good work, and increasing unto the knowledge of God;

Certainly, this verse might be understood as referring to growth in how well we know God. This interpretation understands “knowledge of God” as objective genitive, in which God is the object of our knowing. But the subjective genitive is at least as likely: our growth has as its objective to know what God knows. We find “knowledge of God” as subjective genitive elsewhere in Paul:

Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

In the Garden, Satan tempted our first parents with God-like knowledge. It was not wrong for them to desire that knowledge, but the way they went about getting it was wrong, because it violated God’s command. A strong body is the result of hard exercise, not taking a quack “muscle pill.” According to Heb 5:14, God desires that we learn by the exercise of our senses, a process that Adam and Eve tried to shortcut by the “knowledge pill” of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. As believers engaged in spiritual growth, we can expect over time to know more and more of what God knows, to “increase unto the knowledge of God.” And we ought not to forget that “no man knoweth the Son, but the Father” (Matt 11:27), so that part of that divine knowledge that we can expect to attain is the knowledge of him that is from the beginning.

The sermon has two major parts. 2:14-21 are addressed to “ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem,” while 2:22-36 are addressed more broadly to “ye men of Israel” (reemphasized in his closing address in v. 36 to “all the house of Israel”). The first part explains the immediate events that were attracting so much attention, the Spirit-empowered proclamation of the apostles, and it’s addressed to the immediate audience, those in Judaea and in particular in Jerusalem. The second part goes beyond answering local questions. It makes a succinct but powerful claim that demands the attention of all Israel, even those who were not there on that day and who did not witness the multilingual proclamation. Peter thus begins where his audience is (amazed at the behavior they are observing), and once he has their attention, carries them to a far deeper message that they would never have invited directly.

Both parts of Peter’s presentation are carefully supported by Scripture. The introduction, addressed to the local people, rests on Joel 2:28-32a. The broader address to all Israel rests on Ps 16:8-11 and Ps 110:1.

Consider first the quotation from Joel. Peter stops at 32a, “whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21), because that leads most naturally into his second section, in which he shows the entire nation why it needs to seek salvation. But after he finishes his structured remarks, and is engaging the questions of the people, he picks up part of Joel 2:32b in his exhortation in Acts 2:29. This return to Joel shows how deeply he has been engaged with this OT passage. Where does Peter come up with this verse? Did he just remember it on the spot from a synagogue reading? Or have he and his brethren been pondering the Lord’s promise that “the Holy Spirit” will “come upon” them (Acts 1:8) and thinking through their Scriptures for relevant passages that might explain his meaning? We can’t know for sure, but the selective quotation of Joel 2:32a, maximizing its introductory force to the second section, is a careful rhetorical move that shows a deep familiarity with the Old Testament text, and the Lord’s recent promise of the Spirit might very well motivate them to devote thought and discussion to passages such as Joel.

The move from Judaeans to all Israelites is deliberate, and perhaps reflects another facet of Acts 1:8, the expanding circle of “witness” that the Lord commanded the disciples to bear. They are to start in “Jerusalem and all Judaea” (cf. 2:14!), then move out. Peter summarizes his message for all Israel in v. 36. For reasons that will shortly become clear, I rearrange the verse to match the order of the Greek text:

Both Lord and Christ has God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified.

The summary has three points.

1. He claims that God has made Jesus “Lord.”
2. He claims that God has made Jesus “Christ.”
3. He accuses them of crucifying this one whom God has exalted.

This is not just a summary of vv. 22-35. It is an outline of its structure, in inverse (“chiastic”) order. Let’s look at the details.

The last point in the summary concerns the first paragraph of his comments to all Israel, 2:22-24. This is the only one of the three points for which he does not give a Scriptural proof, but such a proof would be redundant. They all acknowledge that Jesus was renowned for doing miracles. They understand the animosity of the priests, the nation’s official representatives, in crucifying him (cf. John 7:25). They may well have heard rumors of the resurrection (2:24, which also serves as a transition to the second section). They may not recognize the sovereign hand of God in these recent events, but that will become clear in the second and third points.

The second point of the sermon develops the second point of the summary: God has made Jesus to be Christ, or Messiah. Building on the claim of the resurrection in 2:24, Peter turns to the first Scriptural foundation of the second section, Ps 16:8-11. In vv. 25-28, he quotes David, whom he claims to be speaking “concerning him,” that is, concerning Jesus. In the Psalm, David prays to God (2:27, Ps 16:10),

thou wilt not abandon my soul to hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.

Having presented this text, Peter makes a very pointed observation: David cannot be speaking of himself in this passage, for his tomb on the Western Hill of Jerusalem was well known. If David is not speaking of himself, of whom can he be speaking? David is widely recognized in first century Judaism as the ancestor of the Messiah, and many of his Psalms are understood to refer to Messiah, so Peter can naturally suggest that the Psalm describes the Messiah, or “Christ” (the Greek translation of “Messiah”), 2:30, 31. David foretold that the Christ would rise from the dead. But Jesus rose from the dead, a rumor that the crowd has heard and that Peter and his brethren substantiate with their own testimony (v. 32). By raising Jesus from the dead, God shows that he is the Christ of whom David prophesied. In the words of the summary (v. 36), “God hath made that same Jesus … Christ.”

The third point of the universal paragraph (2:33-35) develops the first phrase of the summary: God has made Jesus to be Lord. Peter resorts to another Davidic psalm, 110, which describes how Israel’s Lord raises the one whom David calls Lord to his own right hand in heaven. Again, Peter notes that the one described in the psalm cannot be David, so it must be the Messiah.

The previous point established that the Messiah is not in the grave. Neither can he be found anywhere around Jerusalem. Peter claims that he has ascended to heaven, fulfilling the Psalm. The gift of the Spirit is evidence of the honored and powerful position that the Father has given him. It shows that he is the one whom David called “my Lord” in Ps. 110. Or, returning again to the summary in v. 36, “God hath made that same Jesus … Lord.”

Acts 2:24-36 is one of the clearest examples of a chiastic summary and exposition in the Bible. It is not the kind of thing we expect an unlettered fisherman to make up as he goes along, particularly not one who throughout the gospels is remarkable for his verbal gaffes. His punch line is succinct, and gets to the heart of the confrontation between God and Israel. They crucified Jesus; God has declared him to be Messiah and Lord. God has clearly overcome their sin, and they must call upon him for salvation. For each of the two titles he assigns to Jesus, Peter has selected an appropriate Scriptural proof, using the same argument in both cases: David wrote it, David cannot be writing of himself, therefore David must be describing the messiah.

Let’s return for a moment to the relation between the two halves of the message. The first half grabs the attention of the audience by explaining the events that they are witnessing, and sets them up with the interrupted quotation from Joel 2:32a, the need to call on the name of the Lord to be saved. The second half explains the sin from which they need to be saved. The final point of the second half returns to the phenomenon of the Spirit, which was the focus of the first half. Note the development of thought:

• You think this multilingual preaching is the result of intoxication.
• No, it is what Joel promised, the gift of the Spirit from on high.
• And that Spirit’s coming is evidence that the one you crucified has ascended to heaven.

The artistry and rhetorical integration of the message are impressive. That’s why I don’t think it is extemporaneous. The argument’s careful organization shows that Peter thought it through in advance. It’s not clear when Peter formulated it, but we can speculate.

In the ten days between the ascension and Pentecost, the disciples  were together, praying (1:14). Their appointment of a replacement for Judas, motivated by the Psalms (1:20), shows that they were reflecting on the mission that the Lord had given them and how the Scriptures would direct their execution of it. They know that they are to be witnesses to Jesus, starting in Jerusalem (1:8). They know that the Spirit will come to empower them, and that they are not to begin their testimony until that happens (Luke 24:49). It would be strange if they were not praying about these instructions and searching the Scriptures to prepare for their work. How will they present the message? They cannot count on having peoples’ attention for long. They need a focused statement with strong but concise support. It would be very natural for them to think through the form that this message will take in advance, just as street evangelists today prayerfully prepare tracts before they go out into public. When the Spirit comes upon the apostles in Acts 2, they are ready. In that moment the newly fallen Spirit empowers them and directs Peter to speak, but the words that Peter speaks are the result of his meditation on the Scriptures that the same eternal Spirit had given through Joel and David centuries before.

The sermon is coming under attack in many quarters as ineffective and out of date. Yet the practice of delivering material through an extended, carefully prepared verbal presentation has strong biblical precedent. Before abandoning serious expository preaching, let’s think more carefully.

To be clear: what I mean by “sermon” is an extended lecture on a biblical text or theme, prepared in advance by one individual who delivers it orally to a group of people. Unlike a discussion, the presentation is asymmetric (primarily from the teacher to the congregation, though it may be interrupted by questions). Unlike a meditation, it develops its content with an argument that usually takes some time to present. Unlike an extemporaneous address, the teacher devotes effort to preparing it in advance.

WHAT’S HAPPENING TO THE SERMON?

In the days of the Puritans, sermons lasted between one and two hours each [1], and were the central feature of church meetings. Transcripts of these sermons indicate that they were carefully structured, with detailed argumentation. Today, in many churches, the sermon has largely transformed into an inspirational monolog, highly informal, that lasts at most fifteen minutes, and the church meeting is dominated by other activities (sharing, music, and media). Now, I have nothing against sharing, music, or even media in the meetings of God’s people. My concern is simply that they often displace extended prepared teaching. This shift is sometimes justified by an appeal to the notion that “lecture is the most inefficient way to communicate truth: you only remember 30% of what you hear, but 80% of what you do.”

CAUSE FOR PAUSE

At the outset, let’s be careful about those numbers. We’ve all heard them used to justify more innovative communication methods, but they’re an urban legend [2], without any basis of research. No doubt different methods of presenting material do have different levels of effectiveness, and there is a body of research in this area, but the results are complex, depending on many factors besides presentation method. One study even finds no difference between lecture and experiential teaching [3]! In a few moments, I’ll consider some other factors that come into play.

More important for the Christian is the evidence of Scripture. Teachers in the Bible use many different instructional methods. These include (among many others)

• personal discipleship (our Lord’s calling of the Twelve in Mark 3:14-15; Paul’s enlisting Timothy in Acts 16:3)
• visual aids (the little child in Matt 18:2-3; the tribute coin in Matt 22:17)
• demonstrations (Elijah on Mt Carmel in 1 Kings 18:36-38; our Lord’s healings)
• Socratic questions (our Lord to Peter in Matt 17:25-26)

Certainly, we should take advantage of a wide array of methods to communicate spiritual truth. But let’s not forget the ubiquitous role of the extended, formal verbal presentation. Here are only a few examples.

• The entire book of Deuteronomy is presented as a series of sermons (1:5; 5:1; 27:1) that Moses delivered to the nation in the Plains of Moab, before they entered the Promised Land.
• Neh 8 reports how Ezra read the Scriptures to the people “from the morning until midday.”
• Our Lord often gave extended, highly-structured oral presentations. Five of these form the backbone of Matthew’s gospel: the sermon on the mount (ch. 5-7), the missionary discourse (ch. 10), the parables of the kingdom (ch. 13), the discourse on Christian community (ch. 18), and the Olivet discourse (ch. 24-25).
• John devotes four chapters (ch. 13-16) to the Upper Room Discourse.
• Peter’s sermon on Pentecost (Acts 2) shows careful planning and preparation.
• Paul is known for his extended sermons. One is preserved for us in Acts 13. In Acts 20, he preached so long at Troas that a member of the congregation fell asleep.

Paul’s exhortations to Timothy show the importance of careful preparation for such a ministry. He exhorts his young friend,

• 1Ti 4:13 Give attendance [attention, heed] to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.
• 1Ti 4:16 Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine;
• 1Ti 5:17 Let the elders … be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine.

Where the text of these presentations is preserved, we find that they are not rambling ad-lib thoughts, but are carefully organized to develop their message with a clear rhetoric. They reflect extensive forethought by the teacher, and hearers must invest some effort in understanding them. With these clear biblical examples of formal Bible teaching, we should be very cautious about suggestions that the sermon is no longer appropriate for God’s people.

WHAT MAKES SERMONS EFFECTIVE?

In spite of the biblical precedent for preaching and the fallacious nature of the so-called “research” that is cited against “the lecture method,” many people still find sermons unsatisfying. I’m convinced that the problem is not so much the format as how it is used. Just because sermons are biblical doesn’t mean we are justified in doing them poorly. Let’s consider several different factors that can impact their effectiveness. The first two factors tell us when we should use sermons rather than other teaching methods. The last two tell us how we can use them more effectively.

When: The Environment

A sermon is the ultimate low-tech teaching method. It doesn’t need computers, video projectors or screens, or audio systems. It just requires a prepared teacher and a willing audience. This feature certainly was attractive in the pre-digital era, but it is just as valuable today. A sermon can be delivered in a home living-room, in a park, on a street corner, or in the middle of the Appalachian trail. A good sermon requires diligent preparation, but that preparation focuses on the content itself, not on manipulating technologies. The sermon delivers more content bang for the delivery buck than any other approach, and it can be used in a far wider array of environments than any other method.

Of course, other biblical teaching methods, such as personal discipleship, also are low-tech. The sermon is particularly appropriate when one teacher needs to reach a larger group. Perhaps this is why it is so attractive for use by elders as they exercise oversight over an assembly of God’s people. It is useful for the assembly to consider some issues together, and systematic presentation by those in responsibility is an excellent way to deliver the message to everybody at once.

When: The Message

Some messages lend themselves to short object lessons or the hands-on side-by-side demonstration of discipleship. But much of what the Bible teaches us consists of ideas whose relation to one another is crucial to understanding the mind of God. Such information is most naturally presented as an exposition.

For example, the first half of Isaiah is set against the backdrop of complex international relations involving Judah, Israel, Egypt, and Assyria. Isaiah’s message is that Judah must trust in the Lord rather than in geopolitical alliances. Understanding that message in its context requires us to fit it into this historical framework. We don’t need to go outside of the Bible to do this. The Scriptures contain enough background to enable us to reconstruct the context. But it’s difficult to see how one could communicate this web of thought with a short object lesson or a demonstration. Human language is the best tool we have for explaining how ideas relate to one another.

Here’s another example. The first chapter of Ephesians contains (in Greek) the longest sentence in the Bible, 231 words in a complex structure of subordinate and coordinate clauses. God clearly thought that sentence was important, for he included it in the Bible. Understanding it is not a matter of a ten minute inspirational thought. It requires that the teacher first carefully analyze the grammar of the verses, and then explain to his hearers how the thought develops. Anything less is not being faithful to the information that God has revealed.

How: The Preacher

When people express frustration with “the lecture method,” I wonder how many of them are really commenting on the lecturer. Many of us have suffered through lectures in which the professor reads the same dog-eared notes he has used for years in a bored, monotone voice. The problem here isn’t the format of an extended presentation, but the manner in which it is delivered. This kind of delivery is responsible for the reputation of a lecture as a method in which “the notes of the teacher are transferred to the notes of the student without passing through the mind of either one.” Like any other teaching method, the lecture can be done well or poorly. The difference depends on the teacher.

Here are some characteristics of a sermon that can make a  big difference in its effectiveness.

Preparation.–Paul exhorts Timothy to treat teaching as a serious responsibility that requires diligent preparation. The careful organization of sermons that are recorded in the Bible shows that they are not extemporaneous, but carefully planned. It is true that our Lord encouraged his followers not to worry what to say when their enemies deliver them up to persecution (Matt 10:17-19), but that promise does not excuse careless preparation when the teacher is serving his brothers and sisters in the Lord. Careful preparation begins with diligent analysis of the Scriptures that will be expounded, but goes on to think through how those ideas can be developed in a way that will be accessible to the hearers, taking into account their knowledge and interests. It includes thinking of appropriate illustrations, and spelling out the practical application of the truth that is being presented.

Structure.–A classic principle of verbal presentation is that the teacher must “tell them what you’re going to tell them, then tell them, then tell them what you told them.” Appropriate use of repetition cements ideas in the mind of the hearer. It’s a prominent element of biblical style, and in fact of all biblical literature, which was written to be read aloud, not silently [4].

Speaking Style.–The oral style of the teacher can make a big difference in the effectiveness of a sermon. The voice should be loud enough to hear, but not shouted (unless one is preaching on a street corner in a busy city). Words should be clearly pronounced. The tone of voice should be pleasant to the ear, a quality that can be greatly enhanced by smiling while speaking. Sentences should be well-formed and concise. If they are too long, people may not remember the beginning of a sentence when the speaker finally arrives at the end. If the speaker pauses to collect his thoughts, he should not be afraid of a moment of silence, nor try to fill it with “uh, hmm, ahh.” Modern recording technology allows the teacher to listen to himself and ask, “How well would I understand myself? What mannerisms do I have that annoy me? Perhaps they distract others as well.”

Openness–If the setting allows, teachers should encourage the hearers to ask questions during a presentation if they don’t understand something. The Lord demonstrated this approach in the Upper Room Discourse. If answering a question would divert the message from the point the teacher has been led to deliver, it’s certainly appropriate to defer it until later, but it’s better to clarify a point of confusion early than to lose people for the rest of the presentation.

How: The Hearers

Every instance of communication involves two parties: the one delivering the message, and the one receiving it. We have just considered some of the responsibilities of the teacher if we are to follow the scriptural example of extended teaching successfully. The hearer also has responsibilities.

Most people are no longer trained in understanding linear media, such as extended exposition, whether verbal or written, perhaps because so many richer forms of media are available. The sentences we use now are much shorter than those used by speakers of English years ago [5, which shows that the effect antedates modern media]. Most modern readers have difficulty following the argumentation in classics such as Milton’s Areopagitica or the Federalist Papers, works that were well enough understood in their day to have widespread public impact. This lack of skill not only makes long sermons challenging, it also keeps people from understanding the Bible, and when I teach people the Bible, much of my work is simply teaching them to read.

God has chosen to reveal himself to us in an extensive text written in human language. He didn’t give us an MTV video or a movie trailer. He wrote us a book. Whatever our attitude may be toward sermons, it’s our responsibililty to learn to understand extended verbal communication. As we build this skill in order to understand the Bible, we’ll find that we can process sermons better, too.

A classic help in this area is Mortimer Adler’s book, How to Read a Book [6]. His big idea is that understanding an extended argument requires the reader to engage actively in a silent conversation with the presenter. Some useful techniques in this direction are available in a short paper available on the web [7]. These techniques include preparing to engage the book by reviewing the sources on which the author draws, taking written notes while reading, and formulating questions as the argument develops to prepare the mind for possible answers that the author may give. These same techniques are helpful in understanding sermons. Read over the text in advance. Take notes. If you don’t understand something, ask the teacher–during the presentation if the setting allows, and afterward if it does not.

THE END OF THE MATTER

The sermon is not the only way to communicate spiritual truth. But it is a biblical way. Down through the centuries, God has been pleased to use it to communicate his word to his people. In some environments and for some messages, it is essential. Instead of discarding the approach, we should carefully consider the responsibilities of both teacher and hearer in continuing this biblical pattern of instruction.

REFERENCES

[1]  Harry S. Stout, The New England Soul: Preaching and Religious Culture in Colonial New England. Oxford University Press, 1986.

[2]  http://www.willatworklearning.com/2006/05/people_remember.html

[3]  Newsome, L.A., Wardlow, G.W., Johnson, D.M. (2005). Effects of Lecture Versus Experiential Teaching Method on Cognitive Achievement, Retention, and Attitude Among High School Agriscience Students. Proceedings from the National AAAE Research Conference. San Antonio, TX. http://aaae.okstate.edu/proceedings/2005/Articles/146.pdf.

[4]  H. V. D. Parunak. Oral Typesetting: Some Uses of Biblical Structure. Biblica 62:153-168, 1981. Copy available from the author on request.

[5]  L. A. Sherman, Analytics of Literature, Boston, 1892, p. 259. http://books.google.com/books?id=SWe0U_zp6M8C&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

[6]  The most recent edition of this classic, originally published in 1940, is M. Adler, C. L. Van Doren, How to Read a Book. Simon and Schuster, 1972.

[7]    P. N. Edwards. How to Read a Book.   University of Michigan School of Information, Ann Arbor, MI, 2008. http://pne.people.si.umich.edu/PDF/howtoread.pdf.

This is not the only word family that is negative when applied to man, but positive when applied to God. Here are two examples from another:

Isa 12:5 Sing unto the LORD; for he hath done excellent things: this is known in all the earth.

Ps 17:10 [The wicked] are inclosed in their own fat: with their mouth they speak proudly.

This time, the focus is on pride. It is wonderful for God to behave in a proud, haughty fashion, but every verse that applies these terms to people condemns them.

This word family is derived from the root גא, whose derivatives all share the notion of height and elevation, either physical or psychological. In fact, our English word “haughty” comes from the same root as “height.” Let’s consider some members of this family.

גאות
The two examples given above extend the form as an abstract, גאות. It’s used of people in only one other place, where it also mocks groundless pride:

Isa 28:1-3 Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is a fading flower, which are on the head of the fat valleys of them that are overcome with wine! 2 Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as a tempest of hail and a destroying storm, as a flood of mighty waters overflowing, shall cast down to the earth with the hand. 3 The crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim, shall be trodden under feet.

גאון
Another noun derived from this root is גאון. Again, God is praised for exhibiting this tendency, but people are uniformly condemned when they behave this way. Here are some verses that apply it to the Lord:

Exo 15:6-7 Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power:
thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy.
7 And in the greatness of thine excellency thou hast overthrown them that rose up against thee:
thou sentest forth thy wrath, which consumed them as stubble.

Isa 24:14 They shall lift up their voice,
they shall sing for the majesty of the LORD,
they shall cry aloud from the sea.

Isa 2:10 Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust,
for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty. (cf. vv. 19, 21)

And here are some places where it’s used of people:

Pro 16:18 Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Amo 6:8 The Lord GOD hath sworn by himself, saith the LORD the God of hosts, I abhor the excellency of Jacob, and hate his palaces: therefore will I deliver up the city with all that is therein.

Jer 13:9 Thus saith the LORD, After this manner will I mar the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem.

Pro 8:13 The fear of the LORD is to hate evil:
pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.

“Pride” in this verse is גאה, which we’ll consider shortly.

Isa 13:11  And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

“Haughtiness” is גאוה, which we’ll consider later.

Occasionally, גאון is used positively of people, but in every case it describes their attitude toward something that God has given them, not what they claim to be in themselves.

Isa 4:2 In that day shall the branch of the LORD be beautiful and glorious, and the fruit of the earth shall be excellent and comely for them that are escaped of Israel.

In the Messianic age, the remnant will rejoice in the fruit of the land that God gives them.

Psa 47:4 He shall choose our inheritance for us, the excellency of Jacob whom he loved.

The “inheritance” is the land that he has given them, which they count as their prized possession. When they become self-confident in their possession, he judges them for it:

Amo 6:8  The Lord GOD hath sworn by himself, saith the LORD the God of hosts, I abhor the excellency of Jacob, and hate his palaces: therefore will I deliver up the city with all that is therein.

גאה
Moses praised God, using the verb of this form, at the Red Sea:

Exo 15:1 Then sang Moses and the children of Israel this song unto the LORD, and spake, saying, I will sing unto the LORD, for he hath triumphed gloriously: the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea. (also v. 21)

But Job laments that such conduct on his part would invite God’s judgment:

Job 10:16 And were my head lifted up, you would hunt me like a lion and again work wonders against me.

Nouns of the form גאה are used only of people, and are uniformly negative (as in Prov 8:13, cited above; cf. also Isa 2:12; Jer 48:29; Ps 94:2; 140:6; Pr 15:25; 16:19; Jb 40:11f). But the extended form גאוה is used both of God and of people, and again, what is praised in the Lord is condemned in his creatures.

Here are instances where גאוה is used of God:

Deu 33:26 There is none like unto the God of Jeshurun, who rideth upon the heaven in thy help, and in his excellency on the sky.

Psa 68:34 Ascribe ye strength unto God: his excellency is over Israel, and his strength is in the clouds.

Isa 13:3 I have commanded my sanctified ones, I have also called my mighty ones for mine anger, even them that rejoice in my highness .

And here are examples of cases where it is used of men:

Isa 13:11 And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogancy of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

Psa 10:2 The wicked in his pride doth persecute the poor:

Psa 31:18 Let the lying lips be put to silence; which speak grievous things proudly and contemptuously against the righteous.

Psa 36:11 Let not the foot of pride come against me, and let not the hand of the wicked remove me.

Psa 73:6 Therefore pride compasseth them about as a chain; violence covereth them as a garment.

Pro 29:23 A man’s pride shall bring him low: but honour shall uphold the humble in spirit.

Psa 31:23 Love the LORD, all you his saints! The LORD preserves the faithful but abundantly repays the one who acts in pride.

Zep 3:11 In that day shalt thou not be ashamed for all thy doings, wherein thou hast transgressed against me: for then I will take away out of the midst of thee them that rejoice in thy pride, and thou shalt no more be haughty because of my holy mountain.

Here is a single verse that combines several of the words from this family, all in a condemnation of Moab:

Isa 16:6 We have heard of the pride גאון of Moab; he is very proud גא: even of his haughtiness גאות, and his pride גאון, and his wrath: but his lies shall not be so. (cf. Jer 48:29)

Summary

God thinks very highly of himself. He ought to. He created the world, and everything in it. He never shows any humility. Never, in response to a worshiper’s adoration, does he say, “Aw, shucks, that’s awfully nice of you to say that, but I really don’t deserve it.” In fact, an important element of worship is for us to agree with God’s arrogant assessment of himself.

By the same token, we have nothing that he has not given us. We can do nothing for which he does not give us breath and strength. We are only clay in the potter’s hand. When we think highly of ourselves, we lose sight of our status as creatures. We pretend to be little gods, able to act in our own strength, and deserving the praise of others. Bluntly, we think people should worship us. Such an attitude is a violation of the first commandment, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” It’s no surprise that God condemns pride in his creatures. It is a direct challenge to his glorious sovereignty–a puny and feeble challenge, but a challenge none the less, and one that will stimulate his mocking judgment: “He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh. The Lord shall have them in derision” (Ps 2:4).