A couple of days ago we talked about how Paul modified his approach to sharing the Gospel based on his setting. Paul’s approach, while very bold, never moved to a forceful method of reaching people. In verse 3 we see the underlying method and outcome of Paul’s approach; We continually remember before our God and Father your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ. Nowhere does it say your “reach powered by force”. We must have faith in God which produces labor powered by love and endures because of the hope we have in the saving grace of Jesus Christ. This seems like a pretty good formula to me.
2012 Day 159 – 1 Thessalonians 1
07 Thursday Jun 2012
Posted in Daily Reading
Daily Devotion 
Though opposed to the word formula, your breakdown of the natural out flow is quite good. Id never thought of it that way. Good stuff, Dino (notice autocorrect has been fixed) 🙂
Thanks Sarah! Can you explain what you mean by “opposed to the word formula”? Not sure what you mean…
You wrote “this seems to be a pretty good formula to me “. I think we need to be very careful with the usage of that word because if there’s anything we figure out from scripture it’s that God is not into formulas. He is into relationships. Over the years believers and the church have gotten themselves into a world of hurt by making formulas out of this relationship. As humans we long for an easy, step by step process that we can follow so we can make sure we’re doing the “right” thing. So we know we measure up. So we know our “religion” is working. The whole point of Jesus was to erase that. God proves through the law that we cant possibly follow all the rules. That there is no formula we can rely on to make sure we’re ok, to make sure we are “holy” enough. The only thing we can rely on is a God who came down to save us from ourselves and for himself. We can only rely on that relationship with him. That’s why I’m opposed to the word “formula”. Perhaps it’s just a matter of semantics, but words have meanings and after years of being married to a man I commonly refer to as “semantic boy” I, too, have become much more careful. 🙂
Oh, gotcha. I didn’t mean it to come across as “the formula”… It was just an observation about the parts of the passage fitting nicely together. Thanks for clarifying.