In a press briefing in 2002, United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was asked about a foreign policy dilemma with respect to the danger posed by Iraq. He pointed out that they simply didn’t have all the facts. Far from it—he said they didn’t even know what sort of things they didn’t know. “There are unknown unknowns.” He was not the first person to describe a complex problem in this way. It’s part of a matrix of knowledge and oblivion. There are things we know, and know that we know them (known knowns); things that we know at a deeper level than thinking, but do not consciously acknowledge them (unknown knowns); things that we don’t know, but at least we are aware that we don’t know them (known unknowns); and finally, pertinent details, of which we are totally unaware, not even realizing that there is anything to know (unknown unknowns). This is enough to give anyone a headache, but it’s rather important, not only in matters of national defense, but also in the spiritual realm.

Paul wrote to the Christians of Colossae,

And so, from the day we heard, we have not ceased to pray for you, asking that you may be filled with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so as to walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to him: bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God…

(Colossians 1.9-10)

That’s a lot to take in; but let’s notice one particular detail. He writes that he constantly prays for the Colossian Christians to be “filled with the knowledge of [God’s] will” (v9). What will be the result of having this knowledge? Several things, but the last one on the list is “increasing in the knowledge of God” (v10). Obviously, Paul thinks knowledge is rather important, and it’s not for utilitarian purposes, either. In every earthly matter, knowledge is futile unless it is put into practice; but in heavenly matters, there is no question of usefulness. Of course, knowledge of God is to be put into practice; but it is also its own pursuit, and its own reward.

But as Christians increase in knowledge, a problem arises—pride.

Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that “all of us possess knowledge.” This “knowledge” puffs up, but love builds up.

(1 Corinthians 8.1)

Some of the Christians at Corinth were very pleased with themselves, reflecting a culture that valued knowledge and especially wisdom highly, leading not only to increased demand for these commodities, but also plenty of counterfeit product on the market. It’s not that their conclusions about idols were wrong; it’s that they failed to consider what they did not know. Paul continues,

If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know.

(1 Corinthians 8.2)

And Paul isn’t just putting the Corinthians down for failing to reach his own high standard of knowledge; he confesses his own limits later in the letter, writing, “Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known” (13.12). But the puffed-up, knowledgeable Corinthians managed to neglect the fact that “not all possess this knowledge” (8.7). As a result, they caused a crisis of faith and behavior for their brothers in Christ. Paul agrees that these brothers were weak in knowledge, and we saw him hold up knowledge as both a tool and a goal in and of itself in another letter. They ought to keep learning and growing! But they’re still your brothers, aren’t they? One bit of knowledge does not excuse bad behavior, or make up for a lack of knowledge in all sorts of arenas you can’t even imagine.

While knowledge is wonderful and necessary, it’s not the most important. Later in the letter Paul writes that, among other things, “if I … understand all mysteries and all knowledge, … but have not love, I am nothing” (13.2). And back in chapter 8 he continued,

But if anyone loves God, he is known by God.

(1 Corinthians 8.3)

Love covers a multitude of errors and shortcomings. Paul’s point is that knowing a few things is great and all, but being known by God—being recognized as one of his people—is far more important! That privilege goes, not to those who know many things about God, but to those who love God.

People often think they’ve got it all figured out—the world, the spiritual realm, the moral framework, the exact timeline of the end of this age, and the who’s-who of the final judgment. Not only is this more destructive arrogance of the same sort discussed above, but it also leads in the direction of the first major heresy in the church, called Gnosticism. The name comes—unsurprisingly—from the Greek word for “knowledge,” and it centered around a mindset of superiority and self-assurance. It’s bad enough that individuals hamstrung themselves with this proud foolishness; but others with relatively weak minds and faith were often sucked in by the charisma of overconfidence, and deceived into following these false teachers farther and farther away from Christ.

It’s easy to admit that you don’t know everything. It’s harder to admit that the things you don’t know, might be important. Yet, in the great categorization of knowable things, the list of unknown unknowns is, by far, the longest one for each of us. Embracing that simple truth is part of turning and becoming like a child (Mt 18.3), ready to put your complete trust in your wise and powerful Father, as well as your oldest brother. They’ve been there, done that, and know all of the answers, even though you’re not ready to hear them all, yet. Seek the knowledge; but love and trust in God.

Jeremy Nettles

When he went ashore he saw a great crowd, and he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. And he began to teach them many things.

(Mark 6.34)

Jesus is “the great shepherd” (He 13.20); but his flock is large, and although he is with us in Spirit, he has gone away to another country, as far as the body is concerned. He gave the flock additional shepherds to guide them in his stead (Ep 4.11). This office goes by many names, which are synonyms or translations of each other, but the basic three are: shepherd, overseer (e.g. 1Ti 3.1), and elder (e.g. Ac 14.23). Paul and Barnabas appointed elders in the churches they established, and Paul also instructed Titus to “appoint elders in every town” (Ti 1.5). These men are to teach God’s word to their flocks, silence false teaching, and exercise judgment in the everyday affairs of the church. But who, exactly, should be entrusted with these tasks? The list below is an amalgamation of what Paul told Timothy and Titus.

Blameless

Sometimes translated “above reproach,” this doesn’t mean “sinless,” or everyone would be immediately disqualified; but this is the sort of man who commits few transgressions, and confronts those few directly.

Husband of One Wife

A man must be faithful to his wife, if he is to be faithful over God’s household.

Sober-minded

This word is about a mindset more than actual drunkenness, but the idea is to contrast the judgment and behavior of an intoxicated person, to that of a sober one. Which one would you want for a guide?

Self-controlled

This shows up on both lists, and Titus’ also includes “disciplined,” from a different Greek word. The first is a rational person, not prone to flights of emotion. The other is about having the body under the mind’s control.

Not Arrogant

Sometimes translated “self-willed,” this is less about having an inflated opinion of oneself and more to do with insisting on one’s own way. It’s a behavioral arrogance, not just a mindset.

Respectable

An undignified person is not a good candidate for leadership in the church.

Hospitable

This is more than having people over for dinner from time to time, although that’s a good start. It’s about opening your home more generally, and sharing your resources with no expectation of repayment.

Lover of Good

It’s fair to ask, what Christian doesn’t love what is good? Certainly, we all should; but it needs to be clearly evident in the bishop’s manner of life.

Able to Teach

James warns Christians against becoming teachers (3.1); but a few must be, and cannot oversee the body of Christ without teaching.

Not a Drunk

This is obvious, but note that it complements the mental sobriety covered above, under the heading, “Sober-minded.”

Not Violent

This needs little explanation, but it’s worth noting that military service, for example, does not preclude serving as an elder. The problem is a tendency toward unnecessary violence—not its appropriate application.

Not Quarrelsome

“Violent” conveys action, but “quarrelsome” conveys—once again—a mindset. Not all battles involve violence, and bickering is not conducive to good leadership.

Not Greedy

Regardless of whatever earthly wealth they possess, it must be apparent that pastors love God and his kingdom, not the things of the world.

Holy

We generally think of “holy” as set apart for God. But this is a different Greek word. That one is about categorization; this one has to do with the mindset and behaviors befitting such a categorization—which is a long way to say, living with a view toward pleasing God.

Manages His Own House Well

Paul’s own commentary is most helpful here: “for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church?” (1Ti 3.5).

Not a Recent Convert

Again, Paul’s commentary is vital: “or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil” (v6).

Good Reputation

Paul offers nearly the same comment as with the previous, but instead of “condemnation,” he warns of “disgrace” (v7), which involves harm to the reputation of the church.

Steadfast

Paul ends the list sent to Titus by discussing the problem of “insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers” (Ti 1.10), the point being that presbyters are a bulwark against this danger.

§

Much more could be said about these qualities, but the purpose isn’t to provide enough reason to disqualify every single candidate. Rather, a more helpful approach would be to cultivate these qualities, both in yourself and in those whom you have the opportunity to influence. The next several generations of Christians depend on this for good leadership in the earthly portion of Christ’s kingdom.

Jeremy Nettles

Shortly after Jesus arrived in Jerusalem for his final showdown with the religious and political authorities, leading to his crucifixion and resurrection, he began deliberately making more of a nuisance of himself than usual. Of course, his murderers had been seeking an opportunity to kill him for quite a while by then, but Jesus always avoided or evaded them, saying on several occasions that the time wasn’t yet right. Now, the proper time was swiftly approaching, and Jesus therefore provoked them and allowed himself to be delivered into their hands, to fulfill not only the ancient prophecies, but his own recent prediction,

“See, we are going up to Jerusalem. And the Son of Man will be delivered over to the chief priests and scribes, and they will condemn him to death and deliver him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified, and he will be raised on the third day.”

(Matthew 20.18-19)

Accordingly, he made his entry to the city a spectacle (Mt 21.1-11), and made a smaller but more shocking entrance to the temple (vv12-13), driving out the merchants and money-changers who were profiteering off the people’s sacrifices. These were, first of all, the right things for Jesus to do in those circumstances; but they were also intended to elicit a particular response from his enemies. The authorities came and demanded that he explain himself: “By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?” (v23).

This confrontation began a series of attempts by various authority figures to humiliate Jesus and diminish his standing with the crowds. Instead, they humiliated themselves, and Jesus took several opportunities to twist the metaphorical dagger in the wound. One technique was to tell parables.

“A man had two sons. And he went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ And he answered, ‘I will not,’ but afterward he changed his mind and went.”

(Matthew 20.28-29)

These are pretty standard tropes for Jesus’ parables. It made sense to choose such an agrarian setting for these stories, since viniculture was one of the most important industries in his society. The man in charge represents God, and those whom he directs to work for him—in this case, his sons—are God’s people, the Israelites.

The first of the two sons is blatantly rebellious, telling his father to his face that he refuses to obey his instruction; but while we might expect the father to lash out in judgment, Jesus leaves his reaction to the imagination, and instead gives the rebellious son time to ponder his disobedience. Even though his father is no longer immediately present to see it, this disobedient son arrives at the decision to change for the better. But there were two sons, weren’t there? What about the other one?

“And he went to the other son and said the same. And he answered, ‘I go, sir,’ but did not go.”

(Matthew 20.30)

When the father gives the other boy an instruction, he is vocally submissive, addressing his father respectfully and agreeing to do his will. Once again, Jesus doesn’t tell us the father’s reaction, leaving it instead to our imagination. We would expect him to be pleased with this son, who didn’t fight him and reject his will, like the other! But once again, Jesus jumps forward on the timeline and reveals that the supposedly good, obedient son actually changed his mind, too. He made a show of being dutiful when his father was around, but later, when his father is no longer there to see it, he not only disobeys his instruction, but breaks his own promise, too. At this point, Jesus comes to the crux of the parable:

“Which of the two did the will of his father?” They said, “The first.”

(Matthew 20.31a)

It took no great intellect to figure that one out! The parable makes it plain that, despite appearances and professions, devotion to God is evident in action—in the fruit we bear.

Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him. And even when you saw it, you did not afterward change your minds and believe him.”

(Matthew 20.31b-32)

The second son, who agreed, then disobeyed, represents “the chief priests and the elders” with whom Jesus is speaking (v23). Even as they question Jesus’ authority and profess to uphold God’s, by their actions they reject it and go their own way—otherwise for one example, would they have allowed the seedy, money-grubbing stock exchange to keep operating within the temple grounds?

The first son, although he began as a defiant little snot, actually proved to be the more devoted of the two. He represents the obvious sinners, who didn’t even try to hide their guilt, and as a result were better prepared, upon reflection, to repent and do God’s will in truth.

In context, this parable rebukes the religious authorities for rejecting John the Baptist. They professed to honor God, but scorned his prophet’s message! For us, the lesson is simpler: word is not the same as deed!

What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

(James 2.14-17)

Jeremy Nettles

In The Acts of the Apostles, Luke introduces the reader to a great many individuals whose stories are only known from his book. The early converts to Christianity are particularly meaningful to Christians today. We’re well acquainted with Jesus and his Apostles from reading the Gospels and Acts, but it’s tough for us to relate to these people who function as main characters in the Bible, because their gifts, their accomplishments, their status, and (in some cases) their sins appear far greater than ours. As relative nobodies, we can identify more easily with those who pop into the story briefly, and then are left to go about a fairly boring life, in comparison to the exploits of Jesus, Peter, or Paul.

Simon the Magician

Jesus had told his Apostles to spread his gospel far and wide, “in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Ac 1.8). When the time came to evangelize Samaria, Philip had great success before any of the Twelve arrived. One new convert was a magician named Simon (8.9, 13). It’s likely that his magic took the form of cheap parlor tricks, because that’s mostly what’s available to the would-be sorcerer; but while today’s so-called magic readily admits to being clever illusion with the appearance of supernatural power, most such trickery in the past was used to support bogus claims of actual supernatural power. Simon became a Christian largely because he could tell the miracles being done were real.

Ethiopian Eunuch

Philip also taught the gospel to this man, as he traveled back home from worshiping in Jerusalem (8.27-28). Considering the fuss made over the conversion of Cornelius a few chapters later, it is clear that the Ethiopian was a Jew—likely a proselyte. Philip joined him in his chariot and explained how the Servant section of Isaiah (chs 41-53) predicted the Messiah, and was fulfilled by Jesus. He believed and was baptized along the side of the road, then went on his journey. We’d love to know what he did once he got back to Queen Candace’s court, but Luke leaves his story there, and we’re left speculating.

Aeneas

We don’t read of Aeneas’ conversion directly, but he was a man of the town of Lydda who was severely crippled, then healed by Peter in the name of Jesus (9.33-34). The result was that “all the residents of Lydda and Sharon saw him, and they turned to the Lord” (v35). It’s reasonable to assume that “all” is not meant in its strictest sense here; but also that Aeneas is among this staggering number of converts, being the one person who knew most certainly that he’d been healed, and in whose name. Aeneas is never mentioned again, and we’re left to imagine what he would have done in those circumstances.

Cornelius

Cornelius was already briefly introduced above. Although a gentile, he “feared God with all his household” and recognized the Jews as God’s people (10.2). God chose Cornelius to be the first gentile granted salvation through Jesus, partly because it was so plain that he was a friend of the Jews. The Apostles and elders in Jerusalem still had a hard time accepting that Cornelius and his family and friends were now their brothers and sisters! He, like the others on this list, is never mentioned again in the Bible. Can you imagine quietly going about a life of service to Jesus, while authorities in the church debate—in your absence—whether you can be saved from your sins in the first place?

Sergius Paulus

The only convert named in the course of Paul’s first missionary journey (Ac 13-14) is Sergius Paulus, the governor of Cyprus. Luke calls him “a man of intelligence, who summoned Barnabas and Saul and sought to hear the word of God” (13.7). Despite the efforts of his unbelieving advisor, Sergius “believed, when he saw what had occurred, for he was astonished at the teaching of the Lord” (v12). That’s the last we read of this man in the Bible; but it’s worth noting that Barnabas made at least least one more trip to Cyprus, within the next few years. Perhaps he found Sergius Paulus among a small but thriving church at Paphos.

Lydia

Paul encountered Lydia during his second missionary journey (Ac 16-18) in the town of Philippi. She was evidently a gentile, and as there was no synagogue in the city, she assembled with Jews and other God-fearing gentiles by the river to pray on the Sabbath. In most of the previous cases on this list, Luke records something blatantly miraculous that influenced the hearer to believe in the gospel; but that’s not the case, for Lydia! “The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul” (16.14b). She and her household were soon baptized into Christ, and she immediately insisted on hosting Paul and his helpers while they stayed in Philippi. Paul was soon sent away by the civil authorities, but before he left town he made sure to stop and bid farewell to Lydia (v40). That’s the last we read of her.

§

Many more names fit on this list, but these few help to demonstrate that the worldwide church mostly does not consist of Pauls and Peters. There are far more little people, whose names and stories are forgotten within a few years of their deaths; but they all are just as valuable in God’s eyes. We don’t even know whether any of these early converts stayed the course for the remainder of their lives. You don’t know all that remains of your story, either. How disappointed would you be, to learn that Simon, or Aeneas, or Lydia fell away from grace? Don’t let your story end with that disappointment. Instead, “stand firm thus in the Lord” (Php 4.1).

Jeremy Nettles

The second half of Zechariah’s prophecies are a mix of the obvious and the obscure.

Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion!

        Shout aloud, O daughter of Jerusalem!

Behold, your king is coming to you;

        righteous and having salvation is he,

humble and mounted on a donkey,

        on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

(Zechariah 9.9)

It’s easy to see the fulfillment in the New Testament, when Jesus told two disciples,

“Go into the village in front of you, and immediately you will find a donkey tied, and a colt with her. Untie them and bring them to me. If anyone says anything to you, you shall say, ‘The Lord needs them,’ and he will send them at once.” This took place to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet…

(Matthew 21.2-4)

Matthew certainly recognized the source of Jesus’ odd instructions! At the same time, the context in Zechariah was not obviously about Jesus. It had to do with the coming judgment pronounced against Syria, Phoenicia, and Philistia (Zc 9.1-5). The promise that Jerusalem’s righteous, saving king would be seated on Zion again reads as messianic, given the state of affairs in Judea when Zechariah prophesied; but it certainly sounds like this king will be a man of war, who will establish peace through strength! Of course, that’s exactly what Jesus did—but his battles and strength were spiritual, and a man of his humble appearance and lack of great physical strength was not what the Jews expected.

It certainly does not stop there! For example, in the next chapter we find this:

for the Lord of hosts cares for his flock, the house of Judah,

        and will make them like his majestic steed in battle.

From him shall come the cornerstone,

        from him the tent peg,

from him the battle bow,

        from him every ruler—all of them together.

(Zechariah 10.3-4)

By the end of that quote, the significance has become hazy; but the mention of the tribe Judah and the ruler to come, labeled “the cornerstone,” are too much to pass without comment! The Messiah’s lineage is often emphasized, and his comparison to a foundation stone is likewise part of a pattern, appearing in Psalm 118.22 and Isaiah 28.16—both of which are quoted in 1 Peter 2.6-7.

Another obvious, yet obscure prophecy appears in the next chapter of Zechariah.

Then I said to them, “If it seems good to you, give me my wages; but if not, keep them.” And they weighed out as my wages thirty pieces of silver. Then the Lord said to me, “Throw it to the potter”—the lordly price at which I was priced by them. So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the Lord, to the potter.

(Zechariah 11.12-13)

The speaker appears to be the prophet himself; but the meaning is not clear. Is this a figurative retelling of his prophetic career? Is it a vision? Did it pertain to the present, or the future? In any case, when Judas agreed to betray Jesus, the religious authorities “paid him thirty pieces of silver” (Mt 26.15); but later he felt remorse and tried to give the money back. His co-conspirators refused and so, “throwing down the pieces of silver into the temple, he departed, and he went and hanged himself” (Mt 27.5). The leaders were happy to murder God’s Son, but they drew the line at putting “blood money” into the temple treasury (v6), “So they took counsel and bought with them the potter’s field as a burial place for strangers” (v7). The actors and reasons seem to be shifted around, but this is obviously all foreshadowed in Zechariah’s otherwise obscure prophecy.

A similar case appears in the next chapter.

“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a firstborn.”

(Zechariah 12.10)

God is speaking; yet he seems to label himself as one “pierced” and mourned, as parents mourn their child’s untimely death. There’s no trouble interpreting this in retrospect; we clearly recognize the speaker as Jesus! John’s Gospel makes it explicit.

But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water. …And again another Scripture says, “They will look on him whom they have pierced.”

(John 19.34 & 37)

But one has to sympathize with those who tried to make sense of this passage, before Jesus’ death and resurrection!

There are more  messianic prophecies in these closing chapters of Zechariah, but these are some of the most obvious. Is the point just that the Old Testament is a preface to the New? Well, no—we should already have known that. But what is particularly meaningful in these few cases is that most of the other messianic prophecies in the Old Testament had a much more obvious, near-term fulfillment as their primary focus. Even many of the examples from the first of half of Zechariah fit into this category! But as the time drew near, God started giving his people hints that no longer had the same sort of double meaning. Jesus did something similar:

And when he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. And he said to them, “To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, so that ‘they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven.’”

(Mark 4.10-12)

Many generations longed to know and understand what God has now made plain (cf. 1Pe 1.10-12). Be grateful that he has spoken plainly to this generation. Don’t take this gift for granted; but take advantage of it.

Jeremy Nettles