Dialog

There is another possibility in solving the Laodicean mystery we began talking about earlier this week. Among the ancient manuscripts, there is a tiny letter by that name, Laodiceans, that claims to be Paul’s missing letter. It’s available in most bookstores and on the internet. It’s only twenty verses long, so let’s read it.

Paul Epistle to the Laodiceans
¹ Paul, an apostle not of men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ, unto the brethren that are at Laodicea. ² Grace be unto you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. ³ I give thanks unto Christ in all my prayers, that ye continue in him and persevere in his works, looking for the promise at the day of judgement. ⁴Neither do the vain talkings of some overset you, which creep in, that they may turn you away from the truth of the Gospel which is preached by me. ⁵ And now shall God cause that they that are of me shall continue ministering unto the increase of the truth of the Gospel and accomplishing goodness, and the work of salvation, even eternal life. ⁶ And now are my bonds seen of all men, which I suffer in Christ, wherein I rejoice and am glad. ⁷ And unto me this is for everlasting salvation, which also is brought about by your prayers, and the ministry of the Holy Ghost, whether by life or by death. ⁸ For verily to me life is in Christ, and to die is joy. ⁹And unto him (or And also) shall he work his mercy in you that ye may have the same love, and be of one mind. ¹⁰ Therefore, dearly beloved, as ye have heard in my presence so hold fast and work in the fear of God, and it shall be unto you for life eternal. ¹¹ For it is God that worketh in you. ¹² And do ye without afterthought whatsoever ye do. ¹³ And for the rest, dearly beloved, rejoice in Christ, and beware of them that are filthy in lucre. ¹⁴ Let all your petitions be made openly before God, and be ye steadfast in the mind of Christ. 15 And what things are sound and true and sober and just and to be loved, do ye. ¹⁶ And what ye have heard and received, keep fast in your heart. ¹⁷ And peace shall be unto you. ¹⁸ The saints salute you. ¹⁹ The grace of the Lord Jesus be with your spirit. ²⁰ And cause this epistle to be read unto them of Colossae, and the epistle of the Colossians to be read unto you.[1]

The first thing you’ll notice is how much it sounds like Paul’s other writings. In fact, these twenty verses are primarily verses taken from Paul’s letters, and cobbled together with the final exhortation, “cause this epistle to be read unto them of Colossae, and the epistle of the Colossians to be read unto you” (compare Colossians 4:16).

Every few years someone claims to have found a “Missing Book of the Bible.” The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons) built a whole denomination on the premise they found some missing books of the Bible! So, how do we go about examining claims like that? What questions should you ask?

I would like to know a little bit about the provenance of the book. Who found it? Where was it? And how did it come to see the light of day? Laodiceans is found in over 100 early copies of the Latin Vulgate translation! On the other hand, although Lightfoot detects Greek wording behind the Latin, there is not a single Greek manuscript of the text, nor does it appear in Syriac or other ancient versions. Of the Latin manuscripts, the oldest is “a Fulda manuscript written for Victor of Capua in 546.”[2] The Latin manuscripts range in date from the 6^th through the 12^th century. Since our earliest English manuscripts were translated from the Latin Vulgate, Laodiceans was included in the first English Bibles (Wycliffe’s translation) and in the translations of Purvey.

“Paul’s Epistles to the Laodiceans” is a pious fraud. Someone couldn’t stand the idea that we were missing one of Paul’s letters, so he fabricated one from parts of his known epistles. J.B. Lightfoot’s conclusion (1886) is still apt today:

The apocryphal Epistle to the Laodiceans is a cento of Pauline phrases strung together without any definite connexion or any clear object. They are taken chiefly from the Epistle to the Philippians, but here and there one is borrowed elsewhere, e.g. from the Epistle to the Galatians. Of course it closes with an injunction to the Laodiceans to exchange epistles with the Colossians. The Apostle’s injunction in Col. 4:16 suggested the forgery, and such currency as it ever attained was due to the support which that passage was supposed to give to it. Unlike most forgeries, it had no ulterior aim. It was not framed to advance any particular opinions, whether heterodox or orthodox. It has no doctrinal peculiarities. Thus it is quite harmless, so far as falsity and stupidity combined can ever be regarded as harmless.[3]

[1] From The Apocryphal New Testament Translation and Notes by M.R. James. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924.

[2] Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistle_to_the_Laodiceans

[3] Lightfoot, J. B. (1886). Saint Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (8th ed., pp. 279–280). London; New York: Macmillan and Co.

The two young men dressed in dark suits, white shirts, and skinny black ties sat in my living room. Their white plastic name tags identified them as Mormon elders. They confidently asserted there were “missing books” in the Bible, and we turned to Colossians 4:16.

“After this letter has been read to you, see that it is also read in the church of the Laodiceans and that you, in turn, read the letter from Laodicea” (Colossians 4:16).

There are 27 books in the New Testament, and none of them are called “Laodiceans.” (Go ahead. Check the table of contents. It’s not there.) The Mormon missionaries smugly folded their arms in victory. My Bible was not complete. There were missing letters! They had proven their point, so I asked them to open their Book of Mormon to the missing letter, or perhaps it was in one of their other books, Pearl of Great Price, or Doctrine and Covenants? Nope. So what is the story concerning the letter to the Laodiceans?

Bishop Lightfoot, in his commentary on Colossians, laid out the options for us.

1. Could it be a letter from the Laodiceans to Paul or someone else?
2. Perhaps it was a letter Paul wrote from Laodicea?
3. Or it might be a letter addressed to the Laodiceans from the Apostle John (Lightfoot suggests 1 John) or a companion of Paul (Epaphras or Luke).
4. But what if it is a letter from the Apostle Paul himself?

It’s possible, Laodiceans might be one of the canonical epistles but known by another name. For example, Goodspeed from the University of Chicago thinks it was the letter to Philemon, but how would that personal letter commend itself to the Laodiceans in particular? Did they know Onesimus, the runaway slave? Some other scholars believe Paul was talking about Hebrews, but that’s just supposition. On the other hand, if you examine Ephesians 1:1, most modern English translations include a little footnote. The NIV reads, “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus.” There is a footnote after the words “in Ephesus” that explains: “Some early manuscripts do not have in Ephesus.” In other words, those ancient, hand-written copies simply read “To the saints who are _____, the faithful in Christ Jesus.” The manuscripts contain an incomplete sentence: “to the saints who are ____.” Are what? Very strange! 

As we examine the letter for clues, remember, Paul spent more time in Ephesus than just about anywhere else on his missionary journeys, yet he doesn’t include any personal greetings to any members there. Although Paul hadn’t visited Rome, the last chapter of his letter to the Romans is packed with greetings to Christians living there, so why no greetings to the Ephesians?

As we examine all of the ancient manuscripts of Ephesians, we are surprised to discover some of them fill in the blank in verse one. They read, “to the saints in Laodicea”! Many scholars (myself included) feel Ephesians was an ancient form letter. As Tychicus and Onesimus traveled back to Colossae, I believe they made copies of “Ephesians” for the various churches filling in the blank with that congregation’s name. Laodiceans isn’t lost; it’s just misfiled.

Now, if Ephesians was addressed to all of the congregations, perhaps we should fill our congregation’s name in the blank and re-read this vital letter afresh! Try it.

One of the most challenging concepts in Christianity is the doctrine of the Trinity: God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Perhaps you’ve struggled to explain how we can believe in one God who has three persons. Through the centuries, people have come up with some ingenious explanations for this doctrine.

One group, the modalists, believes God changed form through the ages. First, he was the Father, a warlike God who commanded whole nations destroyed by the Israelites. Then he became the Son during the Incarnation of Jesus. Finally, the third “mode” is the Holy Spirit. The modalistic view is heretical and makes the baptism of Christ into something strange. If there is only one mode, how could the Son be baptized while the Father speaks, and the Holy Spirit descends like a dove? Why are we commanded to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19)?

Another explanation of the Trinity denies the eternity of Christ, the Word of God. They teach only the Father is without beginning or end. The Son, Jesus Christ, has a beginning, and they deny the divinity of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit is just the power of God working like some divine electricity.

So how do we explain the doctrine of the Trinity? We believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, yet we believe in one God. How does this make any sense at all? It doesn’t. There are some doctrines in the Bible that we call “mysteries.” They aren’t mysterious as we usually think about mysterious. They are simply given – like a mathematical axiom.[1] And, if we think about it very long, it should make sense that the things of God don’t make any earthly sense.

For example, can you imagine a world without time? Take off your watch. There is no past, present, or future in God’s world! That makes no sense on earth. Likewise, God is everywhere. He is not bound by space. We are. I’m here; I’m not over there. We are earthbound, but that doesn’t apply to the Lord. Now, do you see what I mean when I say it makes sense that some things of God make no sense?

There are two central Biblical mysteries: the Trinity and the Incarnation. The doctrine of the Trinity teaches we believe in one God, who is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The doctrine of the Incarnation teaches Jesus is 100% divine and 100% human. We can’t explain it, but we believe it.

Note: we believe in the mysteries of the Bible, but we do not believe despite the evidence (that’s just fairy tale faith). We believe because of the evidence. That still leaves us speechless and in awe of our amazing God!

  [1] If it’s been a while since you studied Euclidian Geometry, visit https://mathigon.org/world/Axioms_and_Proof on a excellent explanation of axioms.

Do you write notes in the margins of your Bible? I hope so! The Bible is the Word of God, and we need to be serious students of that Word. Those notes can be precious. I treasure my father’s old Dixon Bible. Some of my best memories are seeing him beside the fireplace with a cup of coffee in his old brown mug, preparing to teach a Bible class. He was a great teacher (and the only man I know who wore out a copy of Josephus). Now I have his Bible and his notes – precious!

On the other hand, writing notes in the margin of a Bible has led to some of the most interesting textual variants. Remember, until the invention of the printing press (Gutenberg, 1440), every Bible was a manuscript – a handwritten copy. If you accidentally left a word out, you could easily add it between the lines or in the margin. Now imagine you are making your own copy of that manuscript. Sometimes it could be difficult to tell whether the note in the margin was a correction or a comment! Such is the case with 1 John 5:7 – 8. Let’s look at the King James Version:

7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

Now compare the New International Version:

7 For there are three that testify: 8 the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

What’s missing? The additional words “testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: the.”

The footnote (you always read the footnotes, don’t you?) explains: “Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century).”

What is the rest of the story? Those additional words (scholars call them the Comma Johanneum) are included in the Latin Bible, the Vulgate, and only in eight of the more than 5,000 Greek manuscripts – and none of the eight copies dates before the sixteenth century! Apparently, an early North African Christian (perhaps Cyprian or one of his contemporaries) saw this passage as an explanation of the doctrine of the Trinity and put a note in the margin of his Bible. It found its way into the text of the later editions of the Vulgate and thus into the King James translation of the English Bible. There is much more to the story, but we’ll save that for another time.

I was a nerd before being a nerd was cool, and nowhere is that more evident than in my fascination with textual variants of the Bible. Before the European invention of the printing press (Gutenberg, 1440), every copy of the Bible was made by hand. That meant, if you wanted a copy of Matthew, either you had to pay a scribe to make one or copy it yourself.

Sadly, none of the autographs (original manuscripts) of the Bible exist. All we have are copies of copies. The problem arose when people made mistakes when they were making copies. Sometimes skeptics will announce there are over 100,000 “mistakes” in the New Testament alone – and they are right. However, if we remove spelling and punctuation errors, only a relatively handful of textual variants are left. (I’ll share the important ones with you in a future article – if there are enough nerds interested. Meanwhile, compare the King James and any modern English translation of 1 John 5:7, 8 for an example.)

The field of “textual criticism” studies these textual variants. “Criticism” doesn’t mean skepticism. It means “to study carefully because understanding the Bible is critical.” Text critics compare all of the manuscripts and try to decide what the apostles initially penned.

These scholars use some very clever principles in their work. For example, we might suppose the reading with the greatest number of manuscripts is the correct one. That means examining all of the different manuscripts and using their readings as votes. The reading with the most manuscripts supporting it wins. On the surface, that sounds good, but that is wrong. Here is why.

In the ancient world, one of the most important tasks of a monastery was copying manuscripts. Sometimes a single monk would devote his entire life to carefully copying a Bible. He prayerfully worked alone, transcribing it one letter at a time. On the other hand, in the giant monasteries, there were rooms full of monks. The chief monk stood in front and slowly read the Bible. The others wrote down what he said. That introduced “errors of the ear.” Did he say “ad or add? Ball or bawl? Duel or dual? To, too, or two?” The challenge was even worse than that! How well did the monk know Greek or Hebrew or even Latin? Those monasteries produced hundreds of manuscripts, but are those copies more valuable than the single Bible the lone monk carefully copied? Manuscripts need to be weighed critically rather than simply counted.

Sadly, there are English translations such as the New King James Version based on the “Majority Text.” Does that mean you can’t discover God’s will by using one of those Bibles? No, but wouldn’t a serious Bible student want to use the best tools, or maybe just a nerd.

I am often asked if the Bible says anything about life on other planets (the short answer is “No”). Still, a question I have always wondered about is, “If intelligent aliens exist, why on earth would they want to communicate with us?”

The first report of “flying saucers” came in 1947 from Kenneth Arnold. He reported seeing “a string of nine, shiny unidentified flying objects flying past Mount Rainier at speeds that Arnold estimated at a minimum of 1,200 miles an hour (1,932 km/hr). This was the first post-War sighting in the United States that garnered nationwide news coverage and is credited with being the first of the modern era of UFO sightings, including numerous reported sightings over the next two to three weeks. Arnold’s description of the objects also led to the press quickly coining the terms flying saucer and flying disc as popular descriptive terms for UFOs.” [1]

However, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence preceded that UFO craze.

By the early part of the twentieth century, it was widely believed that planets in our solar system – most particularly, Mars and Venus – were in all likelihood inhabited by extraterrestrial civilizations. In 1901, inventor Nikola Tesla (1856-1943) announced that he had encountered odd electrical disturbances in his lab, “with such a clear suggestion of number and order” that he believed they could only be considered signals from Mars. “The feeling is constantly growing on me,” he explained, “that I had been the first to hear the greeting of one planet to another. A purpose was behind these electrical signals.” Years later, radio inventor Guglielmo Marconi (1874-1937) claimed to have had a similar experience, convinced that in 1919 he too had intercepted messages from Mars. … While the notion of Martian radio signals was greeted by some engineers and scientists at the time to be little more than wild speculation, others believed the possibility was worth serious study.[2]

American astronomer David Peck Todd argued that if there were Martians, they would probably try to radio earth when the two planets were closest to each other. That date was August 21, 1924. But, if the Martians did try to radio us, would we hear them? Thus “National Radio Silence Day” was born. Owners were asked to keep their radios silent for five minutes every hour so we could listen. The U.S. Naval Observatory carried a radio receiver three miles high in a dirigible. Todd and a navy admiral led the effort supported by an army cryptographer tasked with translating any signals they received.[3]

They didn’t hear anything; however, since the 1960s, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) has continued to listen for voices from beyond our planet. Perhaps they just aren’t tuned to the correct wavelength:

In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe (Hebrews 1:1 – 2).

  [1] Downloaded from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Arnold_UFO_sighting April 5, 2021

[2] Downloaded from https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/ April 5, 2021

[3] Downloaded from https://ufopast.com/2016/12/28/martian-signals-and-the-national-radio-silence-day-of-1924/ April 5, 2021

It’s cute when a little child covers his eyes and announces, “You can’t see me.” It’s quite another thing when grownups deny the truth.

Until 1950, American weather forecasters were forbidden to talk about tornadoes. Common wisdom felt no one could predict twisters, and so to warn people about the possibility of a tornado was just to get people upset. It was better, they felt, to live in ignorance.

Cara Giaimo writes: “From 1887 up until 1950, American weather forecasters were forbidden from attempting to predict tornados. Mentioning them was, in the words of one historian, ‘career suicide.’ During that time, Roger Edwards of the National Weather Service’s Storm Prediction Center writes, ‘tornadoes were, for most, dark and mysterious menaces of unfathomable power, fast-striking monsters from the sky capable of sudden and unpredictable acts of death and devastation.’”[1]

The U.S. Army Signal Service began its forecasting office in 1870. John Park Finley joined the Army in 1877 and soon devoted himself to trying to understand these devastating storms. He visited storm sites and studied historical tornado reports. Then he began issuing tornado forecasts to his in-house weather reports. Nancy Mathis in Storm Warning: The Story of a Killer Tornado tells us, in 1887, “nervous superiors sent [Finley] new instructions: the word tornado was banned from forecasts.” Businessmen were concerned Finley’s reports would drive investors away from “tornado alley,” and they put tremendous pressure on his superiors.

Giaimo reported, “When the department was reorganized, Finley’s new boss, General Adolphus Greely, doubled down on this conviction. ‘It is believed that the harm done by such predictions would eventually be greater than that which results from the tornado itself,’ Greely wrote in a report to Congress. Other professionals agreed, saying that tornado prediction was a pipe dream. As meteorologist William Blasius put it in an 1887 meeting of the American Philosophical Society, ‘Just where the tornado will strike… no man can tell until within a few minutes of its passage.’”

The Weather Bureau prohibited forecasts that included tornado warnings in their regulations of 1905, 1915, and 1934. Then, two U.S. Air Force meteorologists, Major Ernest J. Fawbush and Captain Robert E. Miller, began studying tornados in Alabama, Georgia, and Oklahoma. “In 1948, after correctly predicting several outbreaks among themselves, they finally announced an upcoming doozy–the first tornado forecast in history.” Two years later, the Weather Bureau sent out an internal memo announcing, “the forecaster (district or local) may at his discretion mention tornadoes in the forecast or warning.” It was about time, and although tornadoes are still mysterious, forecasters are actively saving lives today.

I wonder what we’re not talking about? I discovered long ago that the way to kill a conversation is to mention “death,” or “sin,” or “salvation.” However, not talking about something doesn’t make it go away!

  [1] Downloaded from https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/until-1950-us-weathermen-were-forbidden-from-talking-about-tornados

The stereotypical picture of an English businessman is someone in a dark suit, wearing a bowler hat, and carrying an umbrella, but it wasn’t always that way. In the early 1750s, Jonas Hanway began carrying an umbrella around the streets of London. He had just returned from a trip to France where the carrying of a parasol was the fashion.

In the early 1700s, an ingenious Parisian merchant waterproofed the parasol and invented a folding version. Thus, the umbrella was born. Impressed Hanway brought the practical contraption to England. No one else was impressed. People jeered, made fun of him, and called him a French effeminate. Michael Waters explained:

Jonas Hanway, always stubborn, paid little attention to the social stigma. An eccentric man, he was no stranger to controversy—he fervently opposed the introduction of tea into England, at one point penning an “Essay Upon Tea and Its Pernicious Consequences” (1756). He published four books on the development of British trade in the Caspian Sea, leading 20th-century scholar Charles Wilson to call him “one of the most indefatigable and splendid bores of English history.”[1]

Undeterred, Hanway continued to carry his umbrella, but soon incurred the wrath of hansom cab drivers whose business boomed on rainy days from patrons trying to seek shelter from the rain. One driver tried to run Hanway down, but Hanway used his umbrella to “give the man a good thrashing.”

Waters concluded, when Hanway died in 1786, “The rain-repelling revolution had begun, with the dearly departed Hanway as its pioneer. Not all heroes wear capes, but some carry umbrellas.”

I wonder if we can learn a lesson from Hanway as Christians. Are we ever afraid of being labeled because we are Christians? Are we fearful of sharing the good news because we are afraid of what other people will think? Friends, stand tall, carry your Bible, and, on a rainy day, don’t be afraid to take an umbrella!

  [1] Downloaded from https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/the-public-shaming-of-englands-first-umbrella-user March 29, 2021

The Plague of Darkness

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Stretch out your hand toward the sky so that darkness will spread over Egypt—darkness that can be felt.” So Moses stretched out his hand toward the sky, and total darkness covered all Egypt for three days. No one could see anyone else or leave his place for three days. Yet all the Israelites had light in the places where they lived (Exodus 10:21 – 23).

The tour operators in commercial caverns seem to get a perverse delight in turning the lights off. I remember visiting a cavern in Kentucky with my family as a boy. We were all huddled together. Then the guide told us to “Stand still! I’m going to turn the lights off.” He flipped the switch. Darkness pressed in on us just as God described. It was a “darkness that can be felt.” It was overwhelming. After a minute, one man could stand it no longer. He reached in his pocket, pulled out his lighter, and “flicked his Bic.” That tiny flame brought welcome relief to us all and a scowl, I’m sure, to the face of that sadistic tour guide.

I have a lot of questions about this plague. Did the darkness extinguish the light of the Egyptians’ torches too? How did Pharaoh’s messengers find Moses in the dark? Why did it take so long (three days) for Pharaoh to give in? Why did this plague seem so much worse than the other plagues to Pharaoh? It was so bad; it made Pharaoh stop resisting. (Was Pharaoh afraid of the dark?)

Then Pharaoh summoned Moses and said, “Go, worship the Lord. Even your women and children may go with you; only leave your flocks and herds behind” (Exodus 10:24). 

However, the Lord wasn’t finished with Pharaoh: “But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he was not willing to let them go” (Exodus 11:27). It is important to remember the purpose of the plagues. Do you recall how before the plague of locusts, the Lord told Moses:

Then the Lord said to Moses, “Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials so that I may perform these miraculous signs of mine among them that you may tell your children and grandchildren how I dealt harshly with the Egyptians and how I performed my signs among them, and that you may know that I am the Lord” (Exodus 10:1, 2).

The purpose was “that you may know that I am the Lord.” Here then is the key: Pharaoh claimed to be a god. He set himself up in the place of the Lord! This contest was no contest, and that is our lesson for today. Do we ever sit on the Lord’s throne? Do we ever act like Pharaoh? Maybe it’s time to reach in our pockets and shine a light.

The eighth plague, the plague of locusts, gets to the heart of the matter (pun intended).

Then the LORD said to Moses, “Go in to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the heart of his servants, that I may show these signs of mine among them, and that you may tell in the hearing of your son and of your grandson how I have dealt harshly with the Egyptians and what signs I have done among them, that you may know that I am the LORD” (Exodus 10:1 – 2).

Pharaoh is suffering from a hard heart. The big question is, “Who hardened Pharaoh’s heart?” Did the Lord do it, or did Pharaoh do it to himself? In many places (including this passage, 7:3; 9:12; 10:20; 10:27), it says God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, but in others, it says Pharaoh himself was responsible (8:15; 8:32; 9:34).

I remember teaching this principle to children during Vacation Bible School. We conducted a “science experiment.” The children made things out of clay, and I filled a plate with a pound of butter. Then we put them all out on the hot Phoenix summer sidewalk and left them for an hour. Both were exposed to the sun. What do you think happened? Yup, the clay turned into bricks, and the butter melted into a soupy mess. The same sun that hardened the clay melted the butter. No surprise!

One of the early church leaders was “Manaen, a lifelong friend of Herod the tetrarch” (Acts 13:1). Jesus called Herod the tetrarch “that fox” (Luke 13:2). He was responsible for beheading John the Baptist and crucifying Jesus. Manaen and Herod Antipas grew up together. They had the same education and opportunities, so why did one grow up to become a monster and the other died a beloved leader of the church? The same sun was shining on them both. The answer is in their hearts.

As I was working on this lesson, a dear friend of mine asked me, “What are the warning signs of a hard heart?” His answer is brilliant: EGO. A raging ego is a precursor to a spiritual heart attack. No wonder the Scripture repeatedly calls on Christians to humble themselves! Thanks, Tom.

Finally, the Apostle Paul told the Ephesians:

“You must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity” (Ephesians 4:17 – 19).

Exercise: Underline the issues Paul shares in this passage that lead to or result from “hardness of heart.”