Monthly Archives: October 2010

Reforming Marriage and Civil Partnerships

Posted on October 27, 2010 | 3 Comments

The BBC are asking “Why would a straight couple want a civil partnership?” The question comes in the wake of the coming application by Tom Freeman and Katherine Doyle to register a civil partnership rather than get married. They say they do not want to get married because “they do not want to be part of an institution from which gay and lesbian people are excluded”, but yet they “want to make a lifetime commitment to each other and they’d like greater legal and financial security than that offered by simply cohabiting”.

On the one hand, their reasons for rejecting marriage are technically false*; on the other hand, they do have a valid underlying point as to the provision of legal and financial security outside marriage.

There are actually two different things in question here:

  • The first, legal provision of inheritance and taxation arrangements
  • The second, the joining of man and wife as one flesh according to the institution of God.

Civil Partnerships:

The legal provision of inheritance and taxation arrangements does not need to be linked to questions of morality, gender, tradition or consanguinity. It is purely a civil administrative matter. Therefore, it should be open to all: married, unmarried, same-gender, opposite-gender, brother-sister, father-son, grandparent-grandson, three-signatories, or even ten signatories. There is no need to import any restrictions from marriage into this civil taxation and inheritance affair.

Why should two elderly sisters, perhaps being widowed or having never married, who live together and share their lives together, be forbidden the benefits they would be permitted were they unrelated? Why shouldn’t an elderly person being cared for full-time by his daughter not be able to benefit from tax benefits that would apply if she were his wife? Why should we deny inheritance and taxation arrangements to a Muslim man’s second wife because the marriage law only recognises one of them? All these problems, and many many more, can be solved by removing the restrictions which were needlessly imported from marriage into the civil partnership.

Marriage:

Marriage is actually about God joining two persons as one flesh, not taxation benefits

A marriage is defined by God as his joining together of man and wife as one flesh for as long as they both shall live. This is inescapable and immutable. Further, God has set forth various additional restrictions such as the prohibition of certain forms of consanguinity and the requirement of faithful monogamy. Thus, it is a contract concluded not with the state or by the power of the state, but by God and by the power of God. There is no need to join to this institution of God any form of state registration, taxation or inheritance arrangements – nor indeed should the state be involved in registering such marriages as this is the role of the church.

This proposal would see the deregulation of marriage, such that anyone could perform a marriage, but nobody’s marriage would be recorded by the state. Whether one is seen as validly married will be a matter for the church to determine, just as is the case with baptism. Indeed, it is already the case that some forms of marriage are not accepted as valid by some churches – as such the state registration of marriage is already failing. We do not see the need to maintain a government register or license for baptisms – and there is likewise no need to do so for marriage once the tax and inheritance provisions are moved into a separate civil partnership contract.

Those who wish to have such additions to their marriage should be free to sign an additional civil partnership for these benefits. Indeed, seeing that marriage is a religious affair, and civil partnership a state affair, it should be possible to contract a civil partnership with someone other than the person to whom you are married – if it should seem advantageous to do so. We should not discriminate against married people by restricting their use of the civil partnership tax and inheritance contract.

Conclusion

Let us grant freedom to both civil partnerships and marriage, that both are permitted to be what they are designed to be. One a civil taxation and inheritance arrangement (with no reference to relationships or religion), and the other a divine conjoining of man and wife by God (with no reference to the state or the law).

* The institution of marriage does not exclude ‘gay and lesbian people’; rather it is those who consider themselves ‘gay and lesbian people’ who reject the institution. Marriage does not legally require attraction or loving feelings between man and wife, as much as we dearly hope for them; so there is no impediment to ‘gay and lesbian’ people being married, provided they marry someone of the opposite gender. Remember, the word ‘love’ in the marriage vows is a verb not a noun – it is a promise and an obligation, not a statement about your current state of heart.

→ 3 Comments

Posted in Christianity

Tagged , ,

The Reality of Evangelism

Posted on October 22, 2010 | Leave a comment

Can you count the people?

→ Leave a comment

Posted in General

Whether marriage already contracted should be governed by the obligation of a pre-nuptial contract?

Posted on October 21, 2010 | 3 Comments

Objection 1: It would seem that a marriage already contracted ought to be governed by a pre-nuptial contract. For the second contract does not replace the first but adds to it (Galatians 3:17). Now, the pre-nuptial contract comes before the marriage contract, since it is pre-nuptial. Therefore the obligation of the pre-nuptial contract governs the marriage.

Objection 2: An impediment disclosed and accepted by all parties at the forming of a contract cannot be contradicted by such a contract. For the contract is made freely in the light of the impediment and the plain intention is therefore to be compliant thereunto. The pre-nuptial contract has all parties in common with the marriage contract and comes before it. Therefore the obligation of the pre-nuptial contract governs the marriage.

Objection 3: The state of a man before marriage is the same as that following divorce. A man is only prevented from the division of assets with his wife for so long as they are joined. Therefore the contract formerly in force becomes again in force.

I answer that, A thing ceases to be in the power of a man from the fact that it passes into the power of another. Now, a pre-nuptial contract is in the power and possession of a man and a woman before they are wed. A man and a woman when joined in marriage are, by the work of God, no longer two but are one flesh (Matthew 19:6). Therefore the contract, its assets, and its interest pass into the power and possession of the married couple equal such that all benefits which would accrue to one party are now the possession of the couple. If it states a distribution of seven-tenths to the man and three-tens to the woman, when the two are joined as one flesh then the future asset of seven-tenths of the man and three-tens of the woman become aggregated as a promise of the whole to the one flesh. Thus, in the case of divorcement, the division is to be made in accordance to the act of the power of God in conjoining the two as one. No contract in any form whatsoever may override this for the act of joining man and wife is in the power of God and not of man.

Answer to Objection 1: The pre-nuptial contract establishes a future interest which in itself is an asset. These assets become property in common with the conjoining and so even if it is held that the contract survives yet the future interests named in the contract are no longer individual but in common to the one joined couple. Further, if it be insisted that the assets of the contract do not become common (which is by no means the case), it shall be argued: that no contract of marriage is valid if it be entered into illegally; that it is illegal to enter into a marriage without full intention to remain within it for the time the two parties remain alive; that a prenuptial agreement which does not become a common asset provides deliberately for a state of divorcement; thus that the marriage so entered into is invalid.

Answer to Objection 2: The parties of the pre-nuptial contract are not the same as the parties of the marriage. In the pre-nuptial contract are two parties; man and woman. In the marriage are three parties; man, woman and God. Thus, unless it be disclosed to God that such an impediment exists to which God has issued a dispensation exempting the couple from some part of his institution of marriage, then no impediment may be said to imply compliance.

Answer to Objection 3: A man may be set apart from his wife by divorcement but his state does not return to that which was previous to his marriage. For it is forbidden by the law of God to effect the full severance of the marriage bond (Matthew 19:6); also, for the obligation of man to his wife does not cease with divorcement (Matthew 19:9); also, for the two who were joined as one flesh even if separated remain two separated parts of one flesh and thus not the same parties as the two who were formerly joined as one flesh. Thus, the state of the latter is not the same as the former; nor is the identity of the latter the same as the former.

→ 3 Comments

Posted in General

Tagged ,

What is sin?

Posted on October 18, 2010 | Leave a comment

When Paul talks about the origin of sin, he goes right back to the beginning of Genesis, to the account of the events which took place in the Garden of Eden (Romans 5:12). God had told Adam that he was not permitted to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17), a rule Adam broke (3:6). It was in this first sin that man fell from a perfect relationship with God into a state of separation. Indeed, no sooner had he eaten but he started to feel shame and fear of God – covering himself with fig leaves, and hiding from God as he approached (3:8). For his part, God ejected them both from the garden, sending them out into lives of hardship, and fixing a cherubim with a flaming sword to prevent their return (Genesis 3:24).

A Snake

At heart, sin is this state of separation from God – that which prevents us from approaching God without shame and fear; that which means we have no peace with God. When seen in this way, sin is not primarily a question of individual acts of disobedience, but is a state of mankind with its origin in our fall away from God in Adam.

From this corrupt foundation comes forth corrupt thoughts, words and actions. Whilst many of these specific sins are listed in the Bible, they all boil down to the breaking of one of the two great commandments:

[And he said to him,] “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”
Matthew 22:37-40

So, whilst the essence of sin is our state of separation from God, the essence of individual sins is found in our rejection of the God we should love fully, and a failure in that mutual love for our neighbours which is the pure outworking of the love of God.
It is against this background that we read the judgement of mankind in John’s Gospel:

And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil.
John 3:19

Do you notice how closely our rejection of God is bound up in our evil deeds? It is because of our evil deeds that we reject the light of God; but yet it is because of the darkness of sin that we persist in the evil deeds. Paul describes this sorry states as living ‘in the flesh’, because our lives are governed according to that human flesh which fell in Adam. This life ‘in the flesh’ means to “carry out the desires of the body and the mind” (Ephesians 2:3), and graphically describes the way in which sins originate within us, according to our nature:

For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death.
Romans 7:5

Christ also discusses sin using this concept, pointing out that the evil that defiles a person actually originates from within his heart rather than from some external influence (Mark 7:20-23). So, although we often like to think of sin being caused by society, yet the way Bible describes it, although sin may be a part of fallen society yet it springs from each corrupt individual.

And [Jesus] said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person.”
Mark 7:20-23

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Christianity

Tagged , ,

All who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted

Posted on October 17, 2010 | 3 Comments

An Extract from Calvin’s Commentary on II Timothy, on the passage II Timothy 3:12-13:

II Timothy 3:12:
Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.

Having mentioned his own persecutions, he likewise adds now, that nothing has happened to him which does not await all the godly. And he says this, partly that believers may prepare themselves for submitting to this condition, and partly that good men may not view him with suspicion on account of the persecutions which he endures from wicked persons; as it frequently happens that the distresses to which men are subjected lead to unfavorable opinions concerning them; for he whom men regard with aversion is immediately declared by the common people to be hated by God.

By this general statement, therefore, Paul classes himself with the children of God, and, at the same time, exhorts all the children of God to prepare for enduring persecutions; for, if this condition is laid down for “all who wish to live a godly life in Christ,” they who wish to be exempt from persecutions must necessarily renounce Christ. In vain shall we endeavor to detach Christ from his cross; for it may be said to be natural that the world should hate Christ even in his members. Now hatred is attended by cruelty, and hence arise persecutions. In short, let us know that we are Christians on this condition, that we shall be liable to many tribulations and various contests.

But it is asked, Must all men be martyrs? for it is evident that there have been many godly persons who have never suffered banishment, or imprisonment, or flight, or any kind of persecution. I reply, it is not always in one way that Satan persecutes the servants of Christ. But yet it is absolutely unavoidable that all of them shall have the world for their enemy in some form or other, that their faith may be tried and their steadfastness proved; for Satan, who is the continual enemy of Christ, will never suffer any one to be at peace during his whole life; and there will always be wicked men that are thorns in our sides. Moreover, as soon as zeal for God is manifested by a believer, it kindles the rage of all ungodly men; and, although they have not a drawn sword, yet they vomit out their venom, either by murmuring, or by slander, or by raising a disturbance, or by other methods. Accordingly, although they are not exposed to the same assaults, and do not engage in the same battles, yet they have a warfare in common, and shall never be wholly at peace and exempt from persecutions.

But wicked men and impostors…
This is the most bitter of all persecutions, when we see wicked men, with their sacrilegious hardihood, with their blasphemies and errors, gathering strength. Thus Paul says elsewhere, that Ishmael persecuted Isaac, not by the sword, but by mockery (Galatians 4:29.) Hence also we may conclude, that in the preceding verse, it was not merely one kind of persecution that was described, but that the Apostle spoke, in general terms, of those distresses which the children of God are compelled to endure, when they contend for the glory of their Father.

I stated, a little before, in what respect they shall grow worse and worse; for he foretells not only that they will make obstinate resistance, but that they will succeed in injuring and corrupting others. One worthless person will always be more effectual in destroying, than ten faithful teachers in building, though they labor with all their might. Nor are there ever wanting the tares which Satan sows for injuring the pure corn; and even when we think that false prophets are driven away, others continually spring up in other directions.

Again, as to the power of doing injury, it is not because falsehood, in its own nature, is stronger than truth, or that the tricks of Satan exceed the energy of the Spirit of God; but because men, being naturally inclined to vanity and errors, embrace far more readily what agrees with their natural disposition, and also because, being blinded by a righteous vengeance of God, they are led, as captive slaves, at the will of Satan. And the chief reason, why the plague of wicked doctrines is so efficacious, is, that the ingratitude of men deserves that it should be so. It is highly necessary for godly teachers to be reminded of this, that they may be prepared for uninterrupted warfare, and may not be discouraged by delay, or yield to the haughtiness and insolence of adversaries.

→ 3 Comments

Posted in Christianity

Tagged , , ,

Five Ways to Avoid Tuition Fee Increases

Posted on October 14, 2010 | 4 Comments

With the current British government mulling over the idea of increasing the already hefty fees charged for undergraduate education, we need to be sure that the delivery of undergraduate education is actually cost effective. I bring you five simple suggestions for cutting costs in place of increasing income.

1. First year from home

The first year of most degrees is basically knowledge acquisition. It can be feasibly completed using downloadable videos of lectures and through the study of textbooks, as distance education degrees demonstrate.

The cost of the first year of a degree can thus be drastically cut if the government commission best-in-class lectures to be used across the country in each field. Instead of tens of thousands of students paying for hundreds of lectures on Engineering Mathematics 101, one single lecturer can be paid once to record a series to be used by students of every university Engineering course in the nation.

A single common examination for students of all universities can be supervised in the evenings, or during term breaks, at local comprehensive colleges and forwarded to their respective universities for marking. Thus, the university with which the student is registered is responsible only for answering questions (via an internet interface/forum) and marking examination papers.

Costs saved:
All lecture hall facilities and lecturer costs for all first year students; additionally, students themselves save on accommodation and transport costs
Release of academic staff now not needed for first year teaching
Additional benefits:
The greater portability of modules completed
Better teaching for all, because the very best lecturer in the country can be used (even third-rate university students can listen to first-rate lectures)

2. Pooled laboratory facilities

Undergraduate laboratory and related practical facilities are an essential part of many degree programs, however the facilities required are very expensive. These high costs can be offset by pooled regional facilities. A regional center can be designed for almost 100% utilisation by scheduling students from different universities at different times of the year, as well as allowing students to live at home whilst attending a center near them. Universities routinely use research assistants and tutors to supervise laboratories, only rarely using teaching staff anyway – so the outsourcing of this should not be a problem at all.

Costs saved:
Universities no longer need to build or maintain undergraduate laboratory facilities which are empty or end up being used by postgraduate/research staff much of the year
Regional centers can compete against each other on price as each offers the same agreed service
Students are able to stay at home during laboratory periods, saving accomodation costs
Additional benefits:
Bulk purchase power is greater at regional centers
Release of buildings and land in universities for sale or redevelopment

3. Honest grading and portability

One of the biggest barriers to the portability of modules between universities is the large difference in quality that exists between establishments, e.g. 82/100 should mean the same everywhere. If modules were all marked against a common scale shared by all universities then it would allow much greater portability. This can be achieved by benchmarking, moderation or the use of a common examination – or a mix of these three. The great cost benefit comes with this greater level of interchangeability.

Honest grading means universities can be asked to open up the module market to competitive offerings. A university, college of further education, or commercial enterprise might develop modules and market them individually. Thus, a student might mix-and-match modules, such that he is able to take advantage of cheaper offerings, and distance education modules, where they exist. It should be possible for a student to complete two years via distance education and local commercial offerings, then transfer to a traditional university for his final year on exactly the same footing as those who have been at the university throughout. Similarly, a student should be able to choose to pay for a module from a local, commercial or distance option in place of one offered by his university, receiving a proportional discount of university fee for that module.

Costs saved:
Universities no longer need to offer all the modules of a course, but can concentrate on the core offerings – students can go elsewhere or use distance learning to add in topics not offered
Commercial competition means that there will be pressure on a module-by-module basis to keep down costs, forcing innovative teaching methods such as digital delivery and e-texts
Students are able to opt out of their university for courses they think to be well taught elsewhere at lower cost
Additional benefits:
The proper benchmarking and honest grading of modules will benefit employers massively because it means they will be able to compare candidates according to the grades obtained without having to guess at current relative grading standards of one university over another
Schools and local colleges will be able to offer individual university level modules where they have sufficient expertise, saving accommodation costs for nearby students and bringing in additional funds to those organisations

4. Remote Students

Is it actually necessary for students to attend lectures in person? Most laptops (and many mobile phones) are able to provide video streaming and conferencing without difficulty. This means that it is entirely feasible for students to stay at home and attend lectures via the internet. The cost saving here is twofold; first, it cuts down the required size of lecture theaters (if all students are remote, lectures can even be given from staff offices or even homes), and second, it means students do not have to pay for expensive accommodation at a university. Coupled with pooled laboratory facilities (item 2), and the remotely administered examinations (from item 1), this idea could mean that many students never actually need to spend time at their university.

Costs saved:
Removes the necessity of providing lecture theater seats for all students
Removes the requirement for university accommodation in many cases
Additional benefits:
The recording of streamed lectures means automatic flexibility for students who have clashing modules or are fitting their university studies around paid employment

5. Final Examination

Much of what has already been suggested has a tenancy to reduce the difference between universities, and this should be a good thing provided the standard that is converged upon is the top-end standard and not the average. However, to preserve university variation and allow for verification of the overall competency of a student, it is suggested that finals are reintroduced.

At the end of a degree, all students could be asked to sit for a single day-long examination covering the entire degree course, and making up a substantial portion of the final grade (e.g. 40%). This examination might combine multiple papers, and could include verbal examination. Thus, the integrity of a degree comprised of modules from different providers would be verified, and the university able to confidently grant the final degree based upon an overall assessment rather than a mechanical addition of module marks.

Cost saved:
Permits the more effective implementation of former ideas, which save costs
Additional benefits:
Employers will know that the student has retained the entire degree course, and has not just learned each module in turn and forgotten it once examined

→ 4 Comments

Posted in Children, Current Affairs, Government

Tagged , ,

A first century letterhead

Posted on October 2, 2010 | Leave a comment

In the first century, letters would usually start off by stating the author, and then the recipient. In a way, it’s something we also do ourselves when we place our own address at the head of a letter, then the name and address of the person to whom we are writing. Of course, the formal layout of a letter has changed over recent years, and with the growth in branding and graphic design it is common to see complex and creative ways to present the sender’s details and identity. Letterheads, whether corporate or personal, increasingly try to add key information about the sender, such as services provided or values held.

It’s interesting then to see much the same take place in the writings of St. Paul, particularly in his letter to the Romans. As he had not previously visited the church in Rome he carefully designed his letterhead to not only identify himself but to give the reader important information about what he is, what work he undertakes, and what beliefs and values he holds.

Thus, he gives his name and appends his chosen tag-line as follows:

Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh 4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, 5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, 6 including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ:
Romans 1:1-6

Paul's letter to the Romans comes complete with a detailed letterhead

Paul's letter to the Romans comes complete with a detailed letterhead

I’m not certain what management and branding experts would make of it, but it’s massively different from those usually held up as classic examples and best practice. Despite this, I personally think Paul’s letterhead does its job really well – not because it is eye-catching – but because through it Paul delivers so much information of such great importance both to him and to his reader. The most essential parts of Paul’s letter are set out here, even before he sets out who the recipient is!

Let’s take a closer look at Paul’s letterhead, bit by bit:

1 Paul
First, like all good letterheads, he states his name – Paul; a name which in itself makes a statement, for Paul was once a Jew by the name of Saul, and was a violent persecutor of the Christian church (Acts 8:1-3). It was after he was intercepted by the resurrected Jesus that he started using the name Paul, although the way in which he gained the new name is not known today (Acts 9:1-6).

a servant of Christ Jesus
Notice, Paul does not describe himself as a Christian, but uses perhaps a better name, that of ‘a servant of Christ Jesus’. He defines himself not by the power he has, or those under his authority, but by the humility he has, and the authority to which he submits in servitude.

called to be an apostle
Jesus had given Paul the task of being an apostle to the Gentiles; an appointment which essentially involves bringing the Christian faith to non-Jewish people (Acts 9:15-16). It brings Paul into the group of twelve apostles who had first been sent out with authority from Jesus to all Israel (Matthew 10:1-4), of whom one had betrayed him and had taken his own life. Back when the apostles were first sent out to proclaim the good news, they had been told in no uncertain terms to only bring the message to Israel – not to the Gentiles, nor to Samaria (Matthew 10:5-6).

set apart for the gospel of God
So Paul himself, just as the earlier twelve apostles, has been set apart for the gospel (the specific good news) of God; but unlike the other apostles, he was sent not to Israel but to the Gentiles. Interestingly, this fulfils the promise of Jesus, who said that his message would go first to Jerusalem, then to Judea and Samaria, and then to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8). Paul, as servant of Christ, explains the matter of his work as being the gospel of God; and by his terms ‘chosen’ and ‘set apart’, attributes his very involvement to God.

2which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures
Next in his tag-line, Paul starts to lay out bullet-points regarding this gospel that he works for. First, it’s not a new-fangled idea, but one which was planned and announced long ago. Indeed it is true to say that this message regarding the good news was both foretold and believed even 2000 years beforehand, and many times between times (Genesis 12:3; Galatians 3:8).

3concerning his Son
The next bullet point tells us simply that the gospel is about God’s Son (Psalm 2:7); setting out the divinity of Jesus Christ, not merely a prophet or a man made a mouthpiece of God, but actually God.

who was descended from David according to the flesh
Almost anticipating our thoughts, we then read of the humanity of Christ: Paul tells us in unambiguous terms that Jesus was descended from King David by means of normal human descent, that which we term ‘flesh and blood’. Further, his descent from King David fulfills the promise of God to raise up a king to an eternal throne from his seed (II Samuel 7:12-13).

4and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead
However, these things are not merely believed because Jesus said them, but also proven; for this same Jesus after being crucified, after having died, and been buried, was then raised from the dead. Such power is only attributable to the Spirit of God himself, and by this act, all that which Christ claimed receives irrefutable testimony and witness from God. Paul rests his faith on this point, saying in another letter, “if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain” (I Corinthians 15:14).

Jesus Christ our Lord
Paul now takes us full circle, for having opened by telling us he is a servant of Jesus Christ, having explained that he is set aside for the Gospel of the Son of God, he returns by declaring the name of the Son, Jesus Christ. Not only does he do this, but he also writes that Jesus Christ is our Lord; by which in the first instance we are to understand that Jesus Christ was the Lord of Paul and the Christians in Rome, and by application to us as Christians, then also our Lord. Although this bullet-point almost duplicate Paul’s claim to be a ‘servant of Christ Jesus’, yet this change in perspective serves to exult the name of Jesus above all others – as Lord of all, just as the earlier statement humbled Paul as a servant.

5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship
Continuing his repetition of key points in his message, Paul returns to the theme of apostleship; again working hard to be absolutely clear that it is something which God has given to him, not something he has asked or earned of God. Thus, he links grace and apostleship, the first being the favour of God towards mankind, and the second the response to which Paul was called by this grace. Having set out the Lord he serves and the nature of his service, the next point is to explain what the end of his labour is, and how his work is relevant to the recipient.

to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name
This he achieves through a short but powerful statement, showing that his work of bringing the message of the Gospel is so that people will obey by having faith in it. Further, as it is the honest design of every loyal servant to labour for the sake of his Lord, so too the end of Paul’s work is for the sake of Christ, to the praise and glory of his name.

among all the nations, 6 including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ:
Finally, he closes the address block by explaining what all this has to do with the Christians in Rome. Simply put, he states that his mission is to the nations (that is, away from Israel), and that this includes those in Rome. Yet, he does not finish the exercise without pointing out that even his recipients owe their faith and salvation in Christ not to their own work, but to the grace of God which has called them.

That brings us to the end of Paul’s letterhead. It would be nice to think you might have learned something good about branding and marketing, but I suspect that might be better studied elsewhere. On the other hand, I hope you have learned a little about Paul, and the Gospel regarding Jesus Christ which he served with such passion and determination. The actual body of Paul’s letter to the Romans is considered by some to be the central book of the Bible, and with good reason; so please do have a read of the rest, if you’ve not done so recently.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Christianity, Current Affairs

Tagged , , , ,