The Letter to the Hebrews is a writing of beauty and power. Because the author doesn’t name himself, he remains unknown. Early Christian tradition attributed the letter to Paul, but that is highly unlikely because of the many differences between Hebrews and the Pauline letters. These differences include both writing style and theology. Among the many differences in theological emphasis, an interesting one concerns the role of faith as the way to salvation. For Paul, faith related to trust in the power of Jesus’ death and resurrection to save. For the author of Hebrews, faith refers to confidence that God’s promises will be fulfilled (11: 1-40).
Although billed as a letter, this New Testament document reads more like a theological sermon. The target audience was probably a church within the Jewish-Christian community sometime toward the end of the first century. The theme of the sermon is clear: Jesus Christ replaces Judaism. The religion brought into the world by the death and resurrection of Christ is superior in every way.
The word of God is eternal and unchanging. Throughout history, God has chosen specific individuals through which to communicate his word. At one point, God chose the prophets. Now he speaks through his own son. The revelation brought into the world by Christ is superior to that of the prophets (1: 1-3). Christ also brings to the world the new and perfect covenant promised by the prophets (8:6-13).
Likewise, Christ is superior to Moses and Joshua. While Moses brought the Law to Israel, Christ brings salvation (3: 1-6). With regard to Joshua, he brought peace to Israel for a time while Christ brings perfect and everlasting peace (4: 1-11).
Jesus also replaces the Jewish priesthood. Sadly, the Levitical priests were unable to make people right with God. Their repeated sacrifices could not defeat the vicious cycle of sin (4: 14-5: 10). Jesus makes an atoning sacrifice for all time and for all people. Because of his act of obedience on the cross, sin is defeated once and for all, and humans are made right with God (10: 1-18). I often wonder how much has changed. There doesn’t seem to be much evidence that the power of sin has been broken for Christian believers.
Finally, Jesus is the new High Priest, the ruler of the faith. He is the supreme High Priest, the High Priest in heaven (4: 14). The Jewish High Priest who presided over the Temple was unable to bring the people of Israel to perfection. Only Christ has the power to do that (9: 1-28). When, I wonder? Maybe in heaven at some time in the future because things haven’t changed much around here.
The sermon also contains several exhortations to the congregation. People will only attain the salvation promised by God if they remain faithful to the church. Those who reject the faith will be judged and consumed by fire when Jesus returns to reward the faithful with salvation (10: 29-30).
Many scholars have pointed out the influence of Plato on the author of Hebrews. There is a sharp distinction made between the phenomenal world of sin and corruption and the spiritual world which is pure and eternal. Law and Judaism only reflect a shadow of the spiritual world. What is truly real is only found in Christ (10: 1-2).
Monday, August 3, 2009
Monday, July 27, 2009
The Pastoral Letters
The Pastoral Letters include First and Second Timothy, and Titus. Although the claim is made that all three letters were written by Paul, the vast majority of scholars believe them to be pseudonymous (written by someone other than Paul). The letters assume an established church, not the missionary movement which was the work of Paul. In addition, religion is about correct belief. One is saved by belief in doctrine, not by faith in the experience of Jesus’ death and resurrection.
I myself wonder why these letters are part of the Christian canon. It is one thing to name a work after a well known figure to support the ideas of that figure. That was a common practice in the ancient world. These letters go well beyond that. In each case, a deliberate attempt is made to trick the reader into thinking that the letter is from Paul. The author of First Timothy has Paul recall events in his early life (1: 13) while the author of Second Timothy invents what sounds like a farewell speech by Paul (4: 6-8). For me, such deception represents fraud.
All this wouldn’t make much difference except that some controversial ideas are found in these letters. First Timothy was written toward the end of the first century after Paul had died. The historical Timothy was a traveling companion of Paul. We know that the letter was not written by Paul because of the attention to church officers—Bishops, Deacons, and Elders—which did not come until after Paul’s time (3: 1-13). The letter contains a rather nasty polemic against false teachers (1: 3-7). More troubling are some well known teachings about the role of women in the church (2: 8-15). Women are not allowed to teach, or to have authority over men, and will be saved by childbearing. These unfortunate second century views continue to determine policy in some churches today.
The author of Second Timothy congratulates Timothy on being a third generation Christian—his grandmother and mother preceded him (1:5). Obviously this Timothy was not the traveling companion of Paul, and the apostle was not the author of this letter. As I indicated above, this letter contains the famous farewell speech of Paul. “I have fought the good fight to the end. I have run the race to the finish (4:6-8).” The letter is also directed against false teachers (2: 14-26) with an emphasis on correct belief. The one idea of interest to me is the author’s claim that all scripture is the inspired word of God (3:6). People will obviously differ as to the precise meaning of inspired. As I have suggested throughout this blog, the books of the New Testament are very human creations. The deliberate use of deception by the author of Second Timothy helps to make this point.
The historical Titus was a Gentile who Paul converted to Christianity. Paul brought him to the famous meeting in Jerusalem where questions concerning the conditions under which Gentiles would be admitted to the faith were decided. The Titus of this letter is not the one who traveled with Paul to Jerusalem. Again, the letter deals with matters of interest to an established church, rather than the household churches founded by Paul as part of his missionary movement (1: 5-9). The letter contains a vicious attack against false teachers (1: 10-16), and an emphasis on sound doctrine as the path to salvation. Beyond that, the letter offers little else of interest.
I recommend that Church leaders meet together as a Council, and vote these three letters out of the canon. Please read them yourself. You may have a different opinion.
I myself wonder why these letters are part of the Christian canon. It is one thing to name a work after a well known figure to support the ideas of that figure. That was a common practice in the ancient world. These letters go well beyond that. In each case, a deliberate attempt is made to trick the reader into thinking that the letter is from Paul. The author of First Timothy has Paul recall events in his early life (1: 13) while the author of Second Timothy invents what sounds like a farewell speech by Paul (4: 6-8). For me, such deception represents fraud.
All this wouldn’t make much difference except that some controversial ideas are found in these letters. First Timothy was written toward the end of the first century after Paul had died. The historical Timothy was a traveling companion of Paul. We know that the letter was not written by Paul because of the attention to church officers—Bishops, Deacons, and Elders—which did not come until after Paul’s time (3: 1-13). The letter contains a rather nasty polemic against false teachers (1: 3-7). More troubling are some well known teachings about the role of women in the church (2: 8-15). Women are not allowed to teach, or to have authority over men, and will be saved by childbearing. These unfortunate second century views continue to determine policy in some churches today.
The author of Second Timothy congratulates Timothy on being a third generation Christian—his grandmother and mother preceded him (1:5). Obviously this Timothy was not the traveling companion of Paul, and the apostle was not the author of this letter. As I indicated above, this letter contains the famous farewell speech of Paul. “I have fought the good fight to the end. I have run the race to the finish (4:6-8).” The letter is also directed against false teachers (2: 14-26) with an emphasis on correct belief. The one idea of interest to me is the author’s claim that all scripture is the inspired word of God (3:6). People will obviously differ as to the precise meaning of inspired. As I have suggested throughout this blog, the books of the New Testament are very human creations. The deliberate use of deception by the author of Second Timothy helps to make this point.
The historical Titus was a Gentile who Paul converted to Christianity. Paul brought him to the famous meeting in Jerusalem where questions concerning the conditions under which Gentiles would be admitted to the faith were decided. The Titus of this letter is not the one who traveled with Paul to Jerusalem. Again, the letter deals with matters of interest to an established church, rather than the household churches founded by Paul as part of his missionary movement (1: 5-9). The letter contains a vicious attack against false teachers (1: 10-16), and an emphasis on sound doctrine as the path to salvation. Beyond that, the letter offers little else of interest.
I recommend that Church leaders meet together as a Council, and vote these three letters out of the canon. Please read them yourself. You may have a different opinion.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Ephesians
The letter to the Ephesians is not addressed to a specific church, but is written as a circular letter, a letter to be read in several churches. Many of the central ideas are very Pauline. Christians are reconciled to God by Jesus’ death on the cross (1: 7 and 5: 1-3). Salvation comes as a gift. It is not accomplished through obedience to religious law. Rather it results from belief in Jesus Christ (2: 7-10). Finally, ethical living flows from a spiritual revolution that takes place in the human heart. Christians become a new creation (4: 22-24). The letter contains a major focus on the type of living that results from this new self (4: 25-5:20).
Despite these similar themes, it is highly unlikely that the letter was written by Paul. To begin with, the writing style and vocabulary are very different from the language usage in the authentic letters. In Ephesians, the sentences are longer and far more complex than what is found in the authentic letters. Different expressions are also used in Ephesians. Saved by faith replaces justified through faith in the authentic letters. The church is also referred to in the singular. All churches are seen as one with Christ as the head (1:23). In the authentic letters, Paul did not write about a universal church, but several churches. When speaking of the church, Paul always used the plural.
There are also subtle differences in the ideas expressed. The conflict between Jews and Gentiles seems to be healed which suggests a later date for the letter after Paul’s death (2: 11-18). The view of marriage is greatly changed. Love between husbands and wives is described as a thing of beauty. The marriage between a man and a woman is compared to the relationship between Christ and the Church (5: 21-33). This exalted view contrasts quite sharply with Paul’s attitude in 1 Corinthians where he counsels couples not to get married unless they are unable to contain their sexual passion. Finally, Ephesians contains hints of a realized eschatology in which Christians participate in Christ’s resurrection now (2:4-6). This contrasts sharply with Paul’s view in the authentic letters that Christians are saved only in the future when Christ returns to meet them in the air.
Ephesians contains a wonderful vision of the Christian church (4: 1-16). It is the place where people are reconciled to God through mutual love. It is also the place where a realized eschatology is achieved. The mutual love practiced among the members is what defeats the forces of evil. Finally, the church is the body of Christ where members use their individual gifts to build up their brothers in Christ rather than to seek their own self aggrandizement.
The letter to the Ephesians claims to be written by Paul. It has a similar organizational scheme as the authentic letters with a greeting in the beginning, the main body of the letter, and comments of a personal nature at the end. Despite these similarities, the many differences from the authentic letters noted above, suggest that the author is probably a member of Paul’s school and not the apostle himself.
Despite these similar themes, it is highly unlikely that the letter was written by Paul. To begin with, the writing style and vocabulary are very different from the language usage in the authentic letters. In Ephesians, the sentences are longer and far more complex than what is found in the authentic letters. Different expressions are also used in Ephesians. Saved by faith replaces justified through faith in the authentic letters. The church is also referred to in the singular. All churches are seen as one with Christ as the head (1:23). In the authentic letters, Paul did not write about a universal church, but several churches. When speaking of the church, Paul always used the plural.
There are also subtle differences in the ideas expressed. The conflict between Jews and Gentiles seems to be healed which suggests a later date for the letter after Paul’s death (2: 11-18). The view of marriage is greatly changed. Love between husbands and wives is described as a thing of beauty. The marriage between a man and a woman is compared to the relationship between Christ and the Church (5: 21-33). This exalted view contrasts quite sharply with Paul’s attitude in 1 Corinthians where he counsels couples not to get married unless they are unable to contain their sexual passion. Finally, Ephesians contains hints of a realized eschatology in which Christians participate in Christ’s resurrection now (2:4-6). This contrasts sharply with Paul’s view in the authentic letters that Christians are saved only in the future when Christ returns to meet them in the air.
Ephesians contains a wonderful vision of the Christian church (4: 1-16). It is the place where people are reconciled to God through mutual love. It is also the place where a realized eschatology is achieved. The mutual love practiced among the members is what defeats the forces of evil. Finally, the church is the body of Christ where members use their individual gifts to build up their brothers in Christ rather than to seek their own self aggrandizement.
The letter to the Ephesians claims to be written by Paul. It has a similar organizational scheme as the authentic letters with a greeting in the beginning, the main body of the letter, and comments of a personal nature at the end. Despite these similarities, the many differences from the authentic letters noted above, suggest that the author is probably a member of Paul’s school and not the apostle himself.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Colossians
Colossians is a tough call for me. Although a growing number of scholars believe that the letter is not authentic to Paul, I am not sure.
The central issue that the letter addresses is the development of mystical views within the church. There seems to be a group of people who worship angels and are deluded with visionary experiences (2: 18-19). The author of the letter points out that this love of higher experience is really a form of self-centeredness. It is based on human achievement, and has nothing to do with the unity of Christ which comes as a gift from God. This argument could certainly have come from Paul.
Within the letter, there is so much that sounds like Paul. Christians are reconciled to God by the death of Christ on the cross (1: 22). Christ overrides the Law (2: 14). Rules no longer play a role in religious life (2: 20-23). With regard to circumcision, one is circumcised not by a human hand, but the whole body is stripped of flesh through a relationship with Christ. (2: 11-12) Good behavior flows from a recreated self (3:10). Finally, church meetings take place in a house (4: 16). There is no hint of an established church organization which came after Paul, and is an important factor in declaring other letters to be not authentic.
Scholars who suggest that the letter was not written by Paul point out that the vocabulary and sentence structure are different from the original letters. They also suggest that there are hints of a realized eschatology, the idea that the kingdom has already arrived in some form. The author claims that Christian believers have both died and been raised with Christ (2: 12-13). In the authentic letters, Paul insists that Christians are not raised to heaven until the second coming of Christ.
Another hint that the author may not be Paul comes in 3:11. The author states the famous Pauline formula that all are one in Christ—Jew/Gentile, slave/free—but omits male/female. This omission may point to a different author or may be nothing more than an omission. When all the evidence is taken together, I think it is safe to conclude that the letter was written by Paul or by a close disciple shortly after Paul’s death.
The central issue that the letter addresses is the development of mystical views within the church. There seems to be a group of people who worship angels and are deluded with visionary experiences (2: 18-19). The author of the letter points out that this love of higher experience is really a form of self-centeredness. It is based on human achievement, and has nothing to do with the unity of Christ which comes as a gift from God. This argument could certainly have come from Paul.
Within the letter, there is so much that sounds like Paul. Christians are reconciled to God by the death of Christ on the cross (1: 22). Christ overrides the Law (2: 14). Rules no longer play a role in religious life (2: 20-23). With regard to circumcision, one is circumcised not by a human hand, but the whole body is stripped of flesh through a relationship with Christ. (2: 11-12) Good behavior flows from a recreated self (3:10). Finally, church meetings take place in a house (4: 16). There is no hint of an established church organization which came after Paul, and is an important factor in declaring other letters to be not authentic.
Scholars who suggest that the letter was not written by Paul point out that the vocabulary and sentence structure are different from the original letters. They also suggest that there are hints of a realized eschatology, the idea that the kingdom has already arrived in some form. The author claims that Christian believers have both died and been raised with Christ (2: 12-13). In the authentic letters, Paul insists that Christians are not raised to heaven until the second coming of Christ.
Another hint that the author may not be Paul comes in 3:11. The author states the famous Pauline formula that all are one in Christ—Jew/Gentile, slave/free—but omits male/female. This omission may point to a different author or may be nothing more than an omission. When all the evidence is taken together, I think it is safe to conclude that the letter was written by Paul or by a close disciple shortly after Paul’s death.
Monday, July 6, 2009
2 Thessalonians
In the ancient world, the designation of author did not always have a precise meaning. There are three possible relationships between the writer and the work written. The first possibility is that the writer is the author of the ideas expressed. Paul wrote Romans. The second possibility is that the writer comes from the author’s school. In this case, the writer may attribute the name of the school’s founder to the work to enhance its credibility. The author or school’s founder, however, remains the authority behind the work. The work contains the ideas of the school’s founder. The third possibility is deception or outright fraud. In this last case, the writer attributes the work to a famous person to enhance the writer’s ideas not the ideas of the famous person whose name is attributed to the work.
In the next three blogs, I will examine Second Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians. These letters are attributed to Paul, and fit either category one or category two as described above. Following these three letters, we will look at the Pastoral Letters—First and Second Timothy and Titus. These last three letters are fraudulent. They fit into category three.
Scholars are evenly divided as to whether 2 Thessalonians was written by Paul. On the one hand, the author claims to be Paul. “Surely you remember me telling you about this when I was with you” (2:5). The author further states that the letter was hand written by Paul (3:8). The basic message is also Pauline: Jesus is coming for those who suffer and believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Those who do not acknowledge God and refuse to accept the good news of the gospel will burn (1:7-8).
The letter addresses a specific problem. There were some members in the congregation who were so convinced that the end was here that they had stopped working (3:6-15). The author’s message was that though the end was coming soon, it may not be right away, and that those who had stopped working should return to work.
The issue regarding authorship centers around the subtle shift in eschatological expectation. In Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians, he urges the congregation to remain on the alert because Jesus will return without warning like a thief in the night. This message is consistent with the theological views presented in the other authentic letters. In 2 Thessalonians, the author says that there will be plenty of warning. Jesus will return only after the Rebel, the antichrist, has established his throne in the temple of Jerusalem, and declared himself to be God (2:4-5). There is no mention of an antichrist in the authentic letters.
Paul is either writing toward the end of his ministry and responding to a different type of problem (the refusal of some to work) or a disciple of Paul’s school is using Paul’s name in order to provide greater credibility to the message in the letter. Because the message of the letter is in the main Pauline, we can rule out fraud as described in category three above.
I take the side of pseudonymity, that the letter was written by a disciple of Paul, because of the different approach to eschatology contained within the letter. The vast majority of conservative biblical scholars believe the letter to be authentic. Regardless of who is right, I don’t believe that this academic debate has much significance!
In the next three blogs, I will examine Second Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians. These letters are attributed to Paul, and fit either category one or category two as described above. Following these three letters, we will look at the Pastoral Letters—First and Second Timothy and Titus. These last three letters are fraudulent. They fit into category three.
Scholars are evenly divided as to whether 2 Thessalonians was written by Paul. On the one hand, the author claims to be Paul. “Surely you remember me telling you about this when I was with you” (2:5). The author further states that the letter was hand written by Paul (3:8). The basic message is also Pauline: Jesus is coming for those who suffer and believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Those who do not acknowledge God and refuse to accept the good news of the gospel will burn (1:7-8).
The letter addresses a specific problem. There were some members in the congregation who were so convinced that the end was here that they had stopped working (3:6-15). The author’s message was that though the end was coming soon, it may not be right away, and that those who had stopped working should return to work.
The issue regarding authorship centers around the subtle shift in eschatological expectation. In Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians, he urges the congregation to remain on the alert because Jesus will return without warning like a thief in the night. This message is consistent with the theological views presented in the other authentic letters. In 2 Thessalonians, the author says that there will be plenty of warning. Jesus will return only after the Rebel, the antichrist, has established his throne in the temple of Jerusalem, and declared himself to be God (2:4-5). There is no mention of an antichrist in the authentic letters.
Paul is either writing toward the end of his ministry and responding to a different type of problem (the refusal of some to work) or a disciple of Paul’s school is using Paul’s name in order to provide greater credibility to the message in the letter. Because the message of the letter is in the main Pauline, we can rule out fraud as described in category three above.
I take the side of pseudonymity, that the letter was written by a disciple of Paul, because of the different approach to eschatology contained within the letter. The vast majority of conservative biblical scholars believe the letter to be authentic. Regardless of who is right, I don’t believe that this academic debate has much significance!
Monday, June 29, 2009
Final Thoughts on Paul
Paul is the founder of the Christian religion. Jesus inspired Christianity and was the life force behind it, but Paul developed the ideas and successfully sold those ideas to the world. Much of what he created is a thing of beauty. The religion of Paul is all about love and living love. There are some underlying assumptions to Paul’s ideas that I find troubling, however.
The first problem is with the idea of Jesus dying for our sins, the concept of the atonement. It is a silly idea. Jesus dies to pay the penalty for the sins of all of humanity. In creating this idea, Paul links the death of Jesus to the original sin of Adam. Because of one man’s sin, humans are alienated from God. Because of one man’s obedience, humans become reconciled with God. (Romans 5:12-21)
If that was God’s purpose for Jesus, why doesn’t Jesus talk about it? You would think that the atonement idea would be a central theme of the gospels, but it is not. The idea is not even mentioned in Mark, Matthew, or Luke.
In addition, the idea of atonement does not explain Jesus’ death. Jesus was crucified, a Roman punishment. The Romans would not have been concerned with a man who came to pay the penalty for human sin. The Romans cared a lot about a perceived threat to the established order. Judas most likely informed the authorities that Jesus was bent on establishing a new kingdom. It is because of this perceived threat that Jesus was crucified.
The Adam part of the equation is equally silly. First of all, Adam and Eve were not historical people. Secondly, Adam’s act of disobedience, as described by Paul, has cosmic significance. It is the act that brought sin into the world. Because of its significance, you would think that Adam’s act would be discussed throughout the Old Testament. It is not. In fact, the story of Adam and Eve is not mentioned again in the Jewish scriptures. Finally, as I pointed out in my book on Evangelical Christianity, the Adam and Eve story is not really about sin, but rather the idea that God and humans are essentially different.
Finally, the atonement theory says something rather silly about God. A God who requires human sacrifice as a condition for restoring the divine/human relationship seems rather petty to me.
The second problem I have with the religion of Paul is that it is based on the need for a profound experience of love. This experience is life changing. It makes the recipient into a new creation. The problem is that few people have such experiences.
There is evidence in the psychological literature that people under great stress may have such experiences. Paul is probably a good example of this type of person. The literature on near death experiences presents many cases of people who have had profound experiences of love that are life changing. If you add together the cases of people under great stress and people who have had near death experiences, you come up with a tiny fraction of the general population.
You also read about profound experiences of love in the mystical literature. Again, the experience is transforming. The problem is that mystics are like extreme athletes. Their experience of love comes after many years of engaging in spiritual practices. Some of these extreme athletes never get there. I, for one, have failed in these efforts.
There are many Christians who claim to have had such experiences. They have been “born again.” The problem is that there is little evidence that the experience they describe leads to inner transformation. They feel good about themselves, but they do not seem to behave in new ways. In my book on Evangelical Christianity, I cite statistical studies that support this conclusion. People who have had born again experiences do not behave differently on ethical matters from the general population.
So Paul’s religion, while genuine, is misleading and not very helpful. As I confessed in my blog dealing with the Sermon on the Mount, I prayed for years asking Christ to come into my life and to make me into a new creation. Nothing happened. Maybe God has hardened my heart.
Third, as I indicated in discussing the rapture (1 Thessalonians 4: 13-18), I do not understand how the final end of Paul’s religion works. To resummarize, at the trumpet of God, Jesus will come down from heaven. The elect who have died will rise first, and then those who are still alive will rise to join them. They will meet Jesus in the air. Where is this heaven? Where are the dead saints being stored? Most of them have been left in this storage facility for a long time. What happens to their bodies? Paul claims, again and again, that this final solution is imminent. Why has it been 2,000 years, and these events have yet to unfold?
Finally, despite Paul’s passionate arguments to the contrary, I find that the religion of Jesus works. As I argued in the blog dealing with the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus was a Jew. He believed that humans could save themselves by obeying religious law. The point of Jewish law is summarized in the commandment to love your neighbor. If you are honest about it, such love does not come easily. To succeed, I have had to learn to reduce the control of ego over my awareness. As this happens, I create space for divine love to enter. My awareness becomes filled with love which in turn allows me to love my neighbor. It’s hard work, but it is possible. The message of Jesus encourages me to persist. When I succeed, my life is filled with purpose and meaning. I find that this spiritual end of meaning and purpose makes more sense than the rapture.
The first problem is with the idea of Jesus dying for our sins, the concept of the atonement. It is a silly idea. Jesus dies to pay the penalty for the sins of all of humanity. In creating this idea, Paul links the death of Jesus to the original sin of Adam. Because of one man’s sin, humans are alienated from God. Because of one man’s obedience, humans become reconciled with God. (Romans 5:12-21)
If that was God’s purpose for Jesus, why doesn’t Jesus talk about it? You would think that the atonement idea would be a central theme of the gospels, but it is not. The idea is not even mentioned in Mark, Matthew, or Luke.
In addition, the idea of atonement does not explain Jesus’ death. Jesus was crucified, a Roman punishment. The Romans would not have been concerned with a man who came to pay the penalty for human sin. The Romans cared a lot about a perceived threat to the established order. Judas most likely informed the authorities that Jesus was bent on establishing a new kingdom. It is because of this perceived threat that Jesus was crucified.
The Adam part of the equation is equally silly. First of all, Adam and Eve were not historical people. Secondly, Adam’s act of disobedience, as described by Paul, has cosmic significance. It is the act that brought sin into the world. Because of its significance, you would think that Adam’s act would be discussed throughout the Old Testament. It is not. In fact, the story of Adam and Eve is not mentioned again in the Jewish scriptures. Finally, as I pointed out in my book on Evangelical Christianity, the Adam and Eve story is not really about sin, but rather the idea that God and humans are essentially different.
Finally, the atonement theory says something rather silly about God. A God who requires human sacrifice as a condition for restoring the divine/human relationship seems rather petty to me.
The second problem I have with the religion of Paul is that it is based on the need for a profound experience of love. This experience is life changing. It makes the recipient into a new creation. The problem is that few people have such experiences.
There is evidence in the psychological literature that people under great stress may have such experiences. Paul is probably a good example of this type of person. The literature on near death experiences presents many cases of people who have had profound experiences of love that are life changing. If you add together the cases of people under great stress and people who have had near death experiences, you come up with a tiny fraction of the general population.
You also read about profound experiences of love in the mystical literature. Again, the experience is transforming. The problem is that mystics are like extreme athletes. Their experience of love comes after many years of engaging in spiritual practices. Some of these extreme athletes never get there. I, for one, have failed in these efforts.
There are many Christians who claim to have had such experiences. They have been “born again.” The problem is that there is little evidence that the experience they describe leads to inner transformation. They feel good about themselves, but they do not seem to behave in new ways. In my book on Evangelical Christianity, I cite statistical studies that support this conclusion. People who have had born again experiences do not behave differently on ethical matters from the general population.
So Paul’s religion, while genuine, is misleading and not very helpful. As I confessed in my blog dealing with the Sermon on the Mount, I prayed for years asking Christ to come into my life and to make me into a new creation. Nothing happened. Maybe God has hardened my heart.
Third, as I indicated in discussing the rapture (1 Thessalonians 4: 13-18), I do not understand how the final end of Paul’s religion works. To resummarize, at the trumpet of God, Jesus will come down from heaven. The elect who have died will rise first, and then those who are still alive will rise to join them. They will meet Jesus in the air. Where is this heaven? Where are the dead saints being stored? Most of them have been left in this storage facility for a long time. What happens to their bodies? Paul claims, again and again, that this final solution is imminent. Why has it been 2,000 years, and these events have yet to unfold?
Finally, despite Paul’s passionate arguments to the contrary, I find that the religion of Jesus works. As I argued in the blog dealing with the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus was a Jew. He believed that humans could save themselves by obeying religious law. The point of Jewish law is summarized in the commandment to love your neighbor. If you are honest about it, such love does not come easily. To succeed, I have had to learn to reduce the control of ego over my awareness. As this happens, I create space for divine love to enter. My awareness becomes filled with love which in turn allows me to love my neighbor. It’s hard work, but it is possible. The message of Jesus encourages me to persist. When I succeed, my life is filled with purpose and meaning. I find that this spiritual end of meaning and purpose makes more sense than the rapture.
Monday, June 22, 2009
The Social Teachings of Paul
Paul’s positions on social issues are well known and continue to have consequences within the Christian community. Some conservative churches refuse to ordain women as pastors because of passages like 1 Corinthians 14: 34-35, which claims that women should remain silent in church meetings. In addition, some Christians believe homosexuality to be a sin because of statements such as Romans 1: 26-27 which condemns homosexuality along with other “degrading sexual passions.”
These issues provide for interesting debate topics. I for one believe that Paul has been misunderstood with regard to the role of women within the church, that he in fact had a high regard for woman for a first century man. All are one in Christ. There are no distinctions between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female (Galatians 3: 28-29). There is also plenty of evidence in Paul’s letters that women played prominent roles in the churches he established. Finally, as I pointed out in my blog entitled “Mark’s Resurrection Story”, many textual scholars have argued that the anti-women statements in Paul were placed there by scribes and not part of his original letters.
But this is not the tact I want to take here. I do not want to debate these issues. The more important question for me is whether Paul speaks in his letters as a first century man or as an especially appointed apostle of God with the authority of God.
He claims the latter, to speak for God (1Corinthians 1:1 and Galatians 1: 13-15), which suggests that his teachings are not time bound and deserve special consideration for Christians living today. I am not convinced. If Paul speaks for God, how can he be so wrong about the most important part of his message which proclaims that the kingdom of God is imminent, that the events relating to the end of the world and the raising of Christians to heaven will take place within his lifetime? We are still waiting for these events to unfold.
Case closed. It is absolutely true that Paul wrote some of the most beautiful statements about love that have ever been written. It is also true that he was not a fan of democratic government (see Romans 13: 1-7). Why is this passage from Romans not considered to be “the word of God” among most American Christians?
The real point is that there is no such thing as “the word of God.” If you are interested in this topic, read my book on Evangelical Christianity. That is the central point of the book. There are so many historical misstatements in both the Old and New Testaments regarding “the word of God” that the idea that such a word exists is without meaning.
Paul’s teaching concerning women, homosexuality, and authoritarian government reflect the opinions of a first century human being. As a result, though some may find them to be interesting, they have no special authority for Christians living in the twenty-first century.
These issues provide for interesting debate topics. I for one believe that Paul has been misunderstood with regard to the role of women within the church, that he in fact had a high regard for woman for a first century man. All are one in Christ. There are no distinctions between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female (Galatians 3: 28-29). There is also plenty of evidence in Paul’s letters that women played prominent roles in the churches he established. Finally, as I pointed out in my blog entitled “Mark’s Resurrection Story”, many textual scholars have argued that the anti-women statements in Paul were placed there by scribes and not part of his original letters.
But this is not the tact I want to take here. I do not want to debate these issues. The more important question for me is whether Paul speaks in his letters as a first century man or as an especially appointed apostle of God with the authority of God.
He claims the latter, to speak for God (1Corinthians 1:1 and Galatians 1: 13-15), which suggests that his teachings are not time bound and deserve special consideration for Christians living today. I am not convinced. If Paul speaks for God, how can he be so wrong about the most important part of his message which proclaims that the kingdom of God is imminent, that the events relating to the end of the world and the raising of Christians to heaven will take place within his lifetime? We are still waiting for these events to unfold.
Case closed. It is absolutely true that Paul wrote some of the most beautiful statements about love that have ever been written. It is also true that he was not a fan of democratic government (see Romans 13: 1-7). Why is this passage from Romans not considered to be “the word of God” among most American Christians?
The real point is that there is no such thing as “the word of God.” If you are interested in this topic, read my book on Evangelical Christianity. That is the central point of the book. There are so many historical misstatements in both the Old and New Testaments regarding “the word of God” that the idea that such a word exists is without meaning.
Paul’s teaching concerning women, homosexuality, and authoritarian government reflect the opinions of a first century human being. As a result, though some may find them to be interesting, they have no special authority for Christians living in the twenty-first century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
