I'm about to begin a Bible study utilizing J. Ellsworth Kalas' book, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS FROM THE BACK SIDE. I thought that perhaps others who are preaching the Exodus text could benefit from his "twists" on the Big Ten so that they move from the deadly familiar to the lively and new place they need in our lives.
1. God shall have all of you.
2. You shall adore the mystery that is beyond comprehension.
3. You shall enter into God's name.
4. The Sabbath will keep you.
5. You shall accept the blessing of the past so that you can have a future.
6. You shall embrace life.
7. You shall cherish the sacredness in you and your mate.
8. You shall become a larger person. [Too bad this one isn't its face value meaning!]
9. You shall bless and be blessed by the truth.
10. You shall rejoice in your neighbor's having.
Here Kalas is using a tool I like to use whenever a group (Sr. High and older) studies the Ten Commandments: restating them positively, or in the case of the two positively stated ones, state them negatively. What everyone eventually comes around to recognizing is the simplicity and power of the stated commandments, which are lost to some degree whenever we try to restate them or expound on their meaning. Not that it's not a useful exercise, of course. It's been said that if we can't come up with at least three alternative means of expressing a truth, we have not adequately appropriated that truth. But there's usually one superior means of stating it. The "Big Ten" are the best example of this that I can think of.
Has anyone else read and/or used this title? If so, have you also taken or taught Disciple I [Bible study]? I thought the Disciple treatment of the Ten Commandments was very good. They are not rules meant to restrict and constrict us, but rather structure in which we find freedom and richness of life.
GREAT text! Looking forward to preaching from it.
Peace, Mary
One of the great turning points in history is the signing of the Magna Carta in 1225. When the king signed this covenant, it limited his powers and planted seeds that centuries later could grow into the constitutional form of government. Yet that event is history pales in comparison to this gift to the Hebrews. This gift, this covenant which was expressed on stone tablets via Moses hand, was a supreme gift to a people who had been abused. Yes, they would still be subject to a figure of absolute authority (God not Moses). Yet, now they had the gift of law. These laws would give structure, order and values which would not be subject to the changing whims of any ruler. Yes, these were the conditions, the requirements on them as their part of the covenant, yet the decalog is a gift to former slaves whose minds need a new way of thinking. Help me develope this thought, will you? Manzel
Manzel, an important thought. It's making me think. Doesn't Mary's sentence about the commandments being, not restrictive, but a structure for freedom tie in? DL in ME
The "Big Ten" is a document that gives us a structure in which to find freedom not a stricture which leads to more bondage.We get caught up in the "Thou shall nots" and forget that there is a positive creating reason for these ten commandments. Kalas' book, "THE TEN COMMANDMENTS FROM THE BACK SIDE" sounds like a good way to view them in a new light. My take has been that the first three are examples of loving God above all else and 5 through 10 are about loving your neigbor as yourself with 4 as the crown jewel that holds it all together. To may reject others in their love of God and too many reject God in their love of others. When we keep holy the Sabbath coming together in common public worship there we find the whole body of Christ. He is present in us and we are present to Him. Mary, I save your post for later use. Who is the publisher of that book?
I'm not preaching this week so I'm just visiting with y'all that have the duty this week. I don't think our lectionary gives us this text this week. We have the Isaiah text fot the OT.
Deke in Texas -- Pax et Bonem
Thank you for the wonderful, affirmative and holistic expressions of the big ten, via Kalas. Yes, these tie in and help us understand the gift of freedom. Manzel
It has been said that the Greek and Roman gods were known by their characteristics or special powers and that God of the old testimant is known by God's actions in interveening in the lives of God's people. Isn't it fair also to say that we know God by coming to know the will of God. Therefore the big ten are great gifts by which we better know God and the goodness of God? Manzel
Everyone who has ever been a parent knows that among the things you have to give children are boundaries. You have to set limits beyond which it is not acceptable to go. Experience and research shows that children who have been given firm boundaries tend to be happier and more secure than those who haven't.<br> Within the boundary, we give our children a great deal of freedom. We allow them to make their own decisions and choices. But we are always there, caring and guiding; we maintain our relationship with them, and expect them to respond - asking for help when they need it, appreciating what is done for them, and learning from us.<br> I think this is a good analogy for God's relationship with his people. The Ten Commandments represent the boundary: largely stated in the negative, as boundaries tend to be, and setting out limits which must not be overstepped. But the boundary is not a substitute for an on-going relationship with God; it merely provides the context for it.<br> A child who has been given firm boundaries, but has a deficient relationship with its parents, may grow up with a strong sense of right and wrong, but no social skills. In the same way, a religion based on the Ten Commandments, but which lacks a relationship with the living God, risks being strong on condemnation, and useless at relating faith to the real world.<br> Jeremy Hicks<br> Fareham, Hampshire, UK
From Joe in Zion
Jeremy in UK, your concluding sentences above capture nicely an argument against posting the Decalogue in courtrooms and government buildings. This is a hot-button issue here in the American South where 'civil-religion' is espcially strong. Aside from separation of church and state issues, the mere posting of the 'house rules' lacks the essential element of personal interaction among the adherents of such rules, ie., a faith community that explains them, lives them, and teaches them. To argue as some do that the 10 are 'law' and therefore ought to be in a place of law, is to miss the deeper nature of 'torah' teaching. Teaching a relationship with God is the role of faith community, not the government or the courts. I feel a sermon warming up here! I hope I have the nerve to see it through. Joe.
Jeremy in UK and Joe in Zion good points both of you. I was thinking after my last post as to how on could connect the OT and Gospel lections. The Isaiah link is easy since it too refers to the vineyard planted by the Lord. I got to thinking as to how the Law and the Ten Commandments in particular are the hedge or fence around the vineyard. The intent of the hedge is to protect the vineyard, the vines and the workers from marauding animals thus increasing the harvest. One thing the Hedge is not to exclude is the owner of the vineyard. It seems that the scribes and Pharisees misuse the Law to give themselves power over the people. Instead of the hedge being protection against outside forces it becomes a trap to the people. Witness how the "elders" continually try to trap Jesus into a violation of the Law.
The Law is "to serve and protect" but is often used as a whip to force the people to do the will of the leaders and not necessarily the will of God. I for one would not care to see the 10 Commandments posted in our public buildings. I think it would cheapen them - make them secular and that they would be no more noticed then the wanted posters in the post office.
Deke in Texas - Pax et Bonem
Mary's point about the Commandments providing the "structure in which we find freedom and richness of life" is a good one. In the introductory verse, "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery," God establishes himself as the author of their freedom. The approach I think I'll take to the passage is to point out that the Commandments are God's instruction concerning how to preserve the freedom he had given them. As we know, in subsequent history, they did not keep up their end of the covenant which resulted in a return to captivity. Somebody said that either we exercise self-control or suffer control from outside ourselves. Self control and ethical behavior is more necessary in democratic societies where the government doesn't exercise strict control of individual choice. Dictatorships exercise control by terror, but democracies must depend upon the personal morality of their citizens. Just some random thoughts, --Rod from Pixley
I appreciated the comments about posting the Decalogue in public places. We've had some local controversy here, with school opening, about this issue. You've given me food for thought. Anyone else out there have views to share on this issue?
Thank you for all your thoughts thus far. I have been wondering - where does Jesus as the fulfillment of the law come into a preaching of the ten commandments. It seems to me, that on their own they do now bring the freedom of life that we need to live in fullness. Any thoughts on this would be most welcome.
Ruth in Ireland
oops! I meant to say that they do not bring the freedom we need. sorry! R in Ireland
The nature of God is revealed in the commandments of God. The commandments are the structure of freedom. I think these are two good statements to begin from. I have talked about the commandments as a portrait or a picture of what true freedom looks like. When we are free, this is what we do.(or don't do) Lewis
The nature of God is revealed in the commandments of God. The commandments are the structure of freedom. I think these are two good statements to begin from. I have talked about the commandments as a portrait or a picture of what true freedom looks like. When we are free, this is what we do.(or don't do) Lewis
I would like to teach the 10 commandments during the children's moments through the next ten weeks. Does anyone have any good children's sources that would be of help in making them easily explainable?
Shalom, Pilgrim
From Joe in Zion
To Pilgrim: for sources for childrens' minutes on the decalogue, see Carolyn Brown's "Forbid Them Not-Involoving Children in Sunday Worship" Abingdon Press. RCL-year A. She does consistently great stuff that's useful for all ages.
To Ruth in Ireland: about Jesus fitting in preaching on the decaloge. Several sources I've been reading link Jesus' two greatest commandments, loving God and loving neighbors as self, and the two general'categories' into which the the 10 are often divided by commentators, namely our relationship with God and our relationship with others. It doesn't feel like too much of stretch to me.
Thanks to all for your comments that have fitted with and affirmed my own thoughts fairly well. Let me share something of the approach I am playing with for Sunday. What grabs me is the tension between this passage - the big 10, which we as Christians "instinctively know" we should keep - and the passage from Philippians where Paul sounds like he's chucking them out in favour of personal relationship with God. How do we need then to understand the keeping of these laws in order to resolve that tension? That's when the gospel comes in and some of discussion about the nature of fences (or hedges) from previous submissions. Parenting as suggested by Jeremy gives a good practical example -"parable"- for people to hook into about setting of boundaries and building of relationships - developing maturity. The laws were given to the "infant people of God" who reach adulthood in the coming of Christ and are released from the bind of the laws. Paul describes himself as reaching this "adulthood".
These thoughts are coming together in my head and the shape of my sermon is emerging! Anyone comments?
Chris, Nyngan, NSW, Australia
Chris,
Yes, I do have some thoughts concerning the "tension" between keeping the commandments and a personal relationship with Christ.
Paul says that the law is a "schoolmaster" to lead us to Christ (Gal. 3:24). I take this to mean that as a standardof behavior they point out the impossiblility of us ever living to please God. Thus, we throw ourselves upon the mercy of God in Christ.
Once we have placed our trust in Christ, however, the commandments become guidelines for Christian living. What once we tried to do out of fear and obligation, we now do out of love and gratitude.
Hope this helps
--Rod in Pixley
While I know that the focus of this passage is the Ten Commandments, did anybody else notice that verses 18-20 were included as well? As I look out from the pulpit on Sundays, I feel as if I am looking at a bunch of Israelites. Some of them have had an encounter (for lack of a better word) with God. Others of them stand at a distance from God. Both groups saying, "You speak to us, pastor, and we will listen." (If they do indeed choose to listen that day instead of grocery shop or organize their closets from the pew.) "But do not let God speak to us, we're not ready for that." Death - in a sense - would be the death of their simple lives and simple faith. To push them into theological thought and Christian living is a challenge for them. Reassurance would come from verse 20: "Do not be afraid." I had a friend who "pig farmed" back in seminary. He drew a practical illustration from that experience. Jeff, if your out there, thanks. Here it goes...He compared the souey? call you give the pigs and their response to it to the call of the Ten Commandments. When the little piglets first here the souey? call, they run in fear. It is only when they learn what it means (ie food!) that they come to the call, that they listen. It is the same with us. We run in fear of the 10 commandments, but only until we come to realize that they are good for us. (See earlier discussions in DPS regarding boundaries.) Karen in MO
Chris and Mary,
I think you are right on the money and Mary, looking at the "back side" is always great! John Calvin looked at the 10 commandments that way nearly 500 years ago. Perhaps I am condensing too much, but he essentially said:
1. We sin. 2. We throw ourselves on God's mercy through Christ 3. We respond in love of God
The third point here I think is paramount. The 10 commandments are a gift for us as they help us get a glimpse of what God wants for our lives. The bar of the law is raised much higher by our love for God through Christ. No longer do we obey just the law, we try to obey the intent, for we are responding to the God we love. Hence, Calvin maintained that "Thou shall not steal" also meant that we should not think of stealing but also to go further, if we have all the food we want but our neighbor is starving, are we truly living up to the full love of the law in the 10 commandments? As I see it, this is a GREAT text to preach on in a positive light...from the "back side." We have a gift in a glimpse of what God expects from us...and out of love for God, how can we truly respond to be "all that we can be" in the eyes of God?
Clint in Pittsburgh
I am so delighted with this discussion this week. What a joy to pop in and 'hear' fellow DPs discussing the heart of this passage in such an edifying way. I guess I need to stray over to the OT lectionary discussion more often!
I was thinking about all this talk about viewing God through the back side of the commandments and it occured to me that throughout scripture there are few who ever saw God's face and lived. Most often when God revealed God's self to a human being (Moses hiding in the cleft of the rock, Elijah hiding in the cave - come quickest to mind) it was God's back side that they saw - and they lived to tell about it.
It wasn't until Jesus came to live among us, fulfiling the 'spirit,' if not the 'letter' of the law, that human beings were finally (as a whole) able to view God face to face - and live to tell about it! The connections aren't 100 percent clear to me right this second ... but they are there ...
Thank you all for being a blessing to me this week. MW in MA
All,
I apologize for not checking back in sooner. I actually preached this reading two weeks ago, as beginning last week we began our stewardship campaign and I began a scheduled break from the Lectionary. I decided to skip forward to this reading as the final sermon in a long OT series. I'm now starting to address "toughie" questions some of my folks have been giving me. ANYWAY...
Kalas' THE TEN COMMANDMENTS FROM THE BACK SIDE is published by Abingdon (1998). The ISBN is 0-687-00524-8. Click on the trusty Circuit Rider logo at the top left (Cokesbury Online) and you can find it. In case any of you teach Disciple Bible Study, Kalas was a presenter in the Disciple I tapes.
The direction I ended up taking with this text was looking past the letter, as Jesus did, to remind us all that we DO NOT keep the Big Ten perfectly. Christ knew that. The point he made that seems to be forgotten so often in organized Christianity in America, is that our helplessness to obey perfectly is actually our starting place for real faith in the One who is the fulfillment of the Law. Our shortcomings at keeping the SPIRIT of the Law should be our confession and cry for mercy. I wish we had sung "Come, Ye Sinners, Poor and Needy" that morning! I think the first verse fits this consideration perfectly:
"Come, ye sinners, poor and needy,/ weak and wounded, sick and sore;/ Jesus ready stands to save you,/ full of pity, love, and power./ Refrain: I will arise and go to Jesus;/ he will embrace with his arms;/ in the arms of my dear Savior,/ O there are ten thousand charms."
I concur heartily with those of you who find a mere posting of the Ten Commandments a grossly inadequate agent for moral improvement. We Americans are in a culture that finds rules more irrelevant than at any time in our future! Relationships, however, are seen as a reliable (if transient) method of determining our morals and ethics. Instead of two tablets on the courthouse wall, practice such radical justice and HESED love that even without words, the Savior's influence is obvious. If our living does not point others toward God, in most cases proclaiming the Law will fare no better.
May God bless you all in your preaching! This was both a difficult AND an exhilarating sermon for me.
Peace,
Mary
Brief illustration, having to do, I guess, with posting the ten commandments. I met a guy named Hugh today; turns out he knows my friend Ed, said to say hello. So this afternoon I called Ed and told him I had a message for him. What was the message, he asked. Hello.
And then of course he asked, who is it from?
kbc in sc
Perhaps I have missed this in the conversation, but I am still struggling with verse 20. If the Ten Commandments were given so that the Israelites (and us as well) might experience freedom, what do we do with verse 20 which reads that God has come only to test us and to put fear upon us so that we do not sin? Fear certainly can lead to obedience - but only coerced obedience. It seems as if much of the message of Christianity has been obey or else. It seems that obedience based out of a response to a gracious God is more likely to occur. Any ideas?
JJ
Well, no one else seems to want to take a pro-post position, so I'll give it a go. I don't think anyone thinks "the Big Ten" on a school or courthouse wall is a panacea. It will not take us back to the fifty's when everything was nifty ('cause it wasn't so nifty anyway, but that's another post.) But, having them on the wall (like on a doorpost, or on your forehead or wrist) does communicate something. Of course, people need relationship and the LAW by itself won't provide that. Why is that an argument against posting the LAW? For the life of me, I cannot see the rationale that ALLOWING the posting of "the Big Ten" on a school wall, entangles the state with religion. But clearly, the FORCED removal of the "Big Ten" does entangle the state with something (you figure out what!) Removing the Big Ten teaches something. Something that should not be taught in public or any other school.
I am aware of the civil religion problem. I've seen it and I don't like it. It worries me, but not as much as the secular religion with which the state is deeply entangled right now.
A Southern Voice from the Bible Belt,
BroKen
JJ,
You bring up some great questions. First, yes, verse 20 is translated as "fear" but that is not the only possibility for the word. The Hebrew word is Ra'ah and according to the BDB it can mean fear or terror but it can also mean "respect" or "awe" or "reverence" or "piety." Perhaps as believers we need a little fear and terror, this is the God who killed the first born in Egypt. But I also am awed and revere God for having sent Christ and forgiven us.
I guess the message I would take is that this passage was written to an audience who did not yet know of Jesus. Making the hermaneutical leap to today, we certainly may be tested, we certainly should have fear, but shouldn;t we also obey God's commandments as a sign of our love? Shouldn't we go beyond what is written and obey what God intends for our lives? If you would like mor details on the thought of the various aspects of God in the Exodus reading, see Donald Gowan's book "Theology in Exodus."
Pax in Christ
Clint in Pittsburgh
Dear JJ
I found this quote somewhere wish I could remember where, oh well here it is.
When we fear God, we fear nothing else. When we don't fear God we fear everthing.
I agree with one of the other posts, that fear = honor. It is living a Godly life because it is the best way, the right way, the way things were intended. To fear God is to give him the respect He deserves and find life in obeying his command.
To the person who wrote about the religious expession in the public schools there is a site with the transcript of the House discussion at; http://thomas.loc.gov/ Look for the Consequences for Juvinile Offenders Act of 1999 (House of Representatives July 17, 1999). Very interesting check it out. Blessings=)
woops that is House of Representatives JUNE 17, 1999 sorry. Blessings=)
Date: 18 Feb 2000
Time: 00:25:17
Title: The Covenant of Life
Synopsis: God has delivered the Israelite people from slavery. Now it is "show time." If they are to be God’s people and live in His presence, they have to live in a different way than they were used to. These laws are not intended to restrict life, they are the only way to really live life.
Ed in WA
Date: 20 Mar 2000
Time: 14:53:53
Ed, To build upon what you have put forth, good approach I think to what seems so restrictive. We can't ignore the debate that is going on in this country about the commandments presence in the public school. Giong to study and bring back more! Darren in Missouri
Date: 20 Mar 2000
Time: 17:49:24
the human tendency is to list all the exceptions to these rules --not the debates about abortion and capital punishment. I think these commandments are not just rules, but the description of the world that God would have for us. They envision a world... Q in CT
Date: 20 Mar 2000
Time: 22:10:36
In today's news (3-20) there is a news story out of Uganda about a cult whose name implies some basis on the 10 commandments. I am thinking about talking about the misuse of the words of God, to suit our own purpose, how we sometimes misread, misquote, lose sight of God's real word for us as the people of covenant. LG in Mystic
Date: 22 Mar 2000
Time: 02:30:25
My sermon title is: A Covenant of Challenge, but that's only because I picked it out to far in advance and before I really thought out my sermon. If I were to retitle it (the bulletin is already printed) I'd call it "Living with the Limits." I've been reflecting on the need for limits in our lives. We usually strain against them and resent many of the limits imposed on us. But they are necessary for living. I remember doing a paper in college on countercultural movements. It was only those movements that were highly structured (Shakers, etc) that survived more than one generation. The looser, individualized movements had a really hard time finding enough cohesion to hold themselves together. I also think of parenting and how children need limits set for them. If there are no limits established they will push and pull and test till they find out what the limits are. As human beings we have a built in need for limits, it seems, both as individuals and as communities. Otherwise we self-destruct. I also think there's a wonderful comparison to be made with our culture's begrudging tolerance of limits and Psalm 19's joyous celebration of them! "Sweeter than honey!" Would that we could learn to love God's limits like that! I also like the references to both the posting of the 10 commandments in schools and the tragedy in Uganda. In both cases there seems to be a misunderstanding of the joyous, freeing nature of God's law, God's humanizing limits set for our benefit. Some thoughts...
JGC in MA
Date: 22 Mar 2000
Time: 05:19:35
I appreciate all of these comments. Darren is correct in saying we cannot ignore the present public school debate. It's going on here in IA, too. Some want these posted in the classrooms. My concern with this begins with who's version does one use. Luther's catechism leaves out graven images and includes a second injunction against coveting. Also, what will this do to people who do not understand the crucifixes (let alone all of our pictures of Jesus)? It looks as if the beginning point of all the Ten Commandments is a response to God's liberating presence who frees us. I am struggling with the misuse of the "Big Ten" to restrict rather than free. --ks in IA
Date: 22 Mar 2000
Time: 15:53:30
Wil Willimon's comments in Pulpit Resource make what I think is a very important observation about the 10 Commandments: They were given to a community that was called to worship God. The Israelite's were to be freed so that they could go to the wilderness and offer sacrifice (worship)to their God. Can we understand the 10 Commandments apart from the worship of God?
Peace,
ROG in NC
Date: 22 Mar 2000
Time: 20:05:24
Doing a little further research and something interesting shows up. In Jeremiah 7:1-15 there is a paraphrase of the basics of the 10 commandments along with a plea against turning the temple into a den of robbers. This connects the exodus passage with the John passage in a fascinating way. Q in CT
Date: 22 Mar 2000
Time: 23:24:21
I tend to chuckle when I see those who struggle with the misuse of the 10 commandments or the misuse of the words of God as reasons to not display the Big 10 in public places.
Or those who are worried about which version of the Big 10 to use or those concerned about people who don't understand the crucifix.
What other excuses will we come up with?
Why can't we see this as an opportunity to educate folks about our faith? What an opportunity to talk about the crucifix, or the Law as something fulfilled by Christ, or the Law as boundaries God has established to keep us from hurting ourselves or others...
We live in a culture where freedom to do anything we desire is abused time and again and we have shepherds who are 'concerned' about the misuse of the 10 commandments...
I shake my head in wonder... How sad.
Rick in Va
Date: 23 Mar 2000
Time: 23:50:23
JG in WI
So many wonderful thoughts...let me share a couple that I've gotten from others.
Joseph Stowell suggests that the Ten Commandments are, in the main, a reflection of God's own nature. Why not commit adultery? Because God keeps His promises. The commandments reflect truth; the true nature of God Himself. In response to Bertrand Russel's argument (which is, in part, "If God is subject to His law then His law is above him."), God is not subject to the law, but His very immutable nature is reflected in it.
R. C. Sproul speaks of the commandments as rules we need until we have a sort of "second nature" about what is righteous. We learn to swim, not in water, but on the beach where we are taught the strokes. Once we learn the strokes on the beach, we go into water ... and flail around not quite knowing what to do, forgetting the "laws" we learned on the land. Finally, after a while, we float and remember the strokes we learned. We follow them diligently and can swim. Eventually, we obtain a style of swimming all our own, but we always remain within the "rules" or strokes we first learned.
Galatians 3:23-24 speaks of the commandments (or law) as the means God used to lead us to faith in Christ. The law is an impossible thing to keep, but Christ fulfilled the law and will fulfill it in us by faith.
Looking for more good things in the future.
Date: 24 Mar 2000
Time: 02:33:38
Hi. I just had a thought that I would like to offer. We are in the season of Lent and it seems to me to be rather interesting that this would be a text to be read and studied. We are in a time of preparation and reflection to be ready for the coming of Easter. How fitting th study the law of God with the recognition of the fullness of God's love being realized in the ressurection of Easter. Just a thought.
Date: 25 Mar 2000
Time: 17:07:35
Hi all, I'm posting before reading, so pardon me if this doesn't relate to any of what you've been discussing.
I had a conversation this week with a young mother who was having trouble with the way the man she is dating relates to her young son. She believes that we should phrase our instructions to our children in positive terms, for example, saying "walk around the pool," instead of saying "don't run." The boyfriend is more likely to holler out "Don't".
After she left m y office, I though about all of the "Don'ts" in the 10 commandments. I also thought about the importance of both positive and negative instructions to our children. When my boys were young, I used both kinds. If I thought they were headed for the street, I would say emphatically, "Don't go into the street!" not "stay on the sidewalk." For one thing, I didn't care about the sidewalk, I wanted them out of the street where it was dangerous. I think we use don'ts more often when danger is involved.
So, back to the 10 commandments. You know that some are written in positive terms and some in negative. Do the negative ones keep us from particular dangers? I think they do. I think our Heavenly Father gives us rules that will keep us from danger.
I've had an extremely busy week. It is Saturday morning, and I'm still studying before I outline my sermon. I had entitled it Ethics 101, but I wish I'd said something about Danger.
Now I'll read what you all are saying and find God's word for me as I prepare.
Thank you all, and God Bless you. Pam in San Bernardino
Date: 26 Mar 2000
Time: 01:30:57
I know its late, but does anyone have The Message paraphrase for this passage? Just wondering how it updates this passage? Thanks, CW in No On
Date: 26 Mar 2000
Time: 05:26:34
For CW in No On: Sorry, but you'll have to try a different paraphrase. The only "The Message" I've got is by Eugene Peterson, and it's the NEW TESTAMENT ONLY!!!