What Did God Get Out Of It?

What did God get out of it? What was Jesus' motivation for sacrificing himself on a cross?

If you had a child with a terminal disease, and you found out that they could be cured through a procedure that would transfer their disease to you, would you do it? I am the Father of 2 children and I would undergo the procedure and die for either one of them.

What would I have gained by doing so? I would have gained my child's life.

This is what God did on a cosmic scale through Jesus's sacrifice. It's interesting that the few times Jesus commented in the gospels on the "mechanics" of his sacrifice, he characterized it as a "ransom" -- 'no, don't take them, take me instead. "

On his cross as Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, in effect, absorbed the terminal disease Christians call 'sin' into himself, thereby destroying the power of death and evil. This cures all of God's children and ransoms us away from our captor. All that is necessary on our part, as it would be if I was saving my child, is for us to be willing to undergo the procedure, to allow the ransom to be applied to us.

So what did God get out of all this? He got his children back.

 

 

 

 

Taking Your Medicine

Grace is like medicine. Sin is an inheritable, terminal disease that we all suffer from. Even the Law depicts sin as something that contaminates you and makes you "unclean." God is more than eager to give you this medicine but he won't force you. You have to take the medicine according to the instructions he gives you.
 

If you do that you are cured.  But how do you know? You know you are cured because the Doctor said you would be once you finished the medicine.  And of course, if you have a relapse what you do is go back to the Doctor and take the medicine he prescribes again. Of course, if you keep having relapses over and over you may be passing by some contaminated place or running around with some sick people. You'll need to quit that if you don't want to keep relapsing.

The tough part of the cure, the horrible, awful part is that it entails you swapping your blood with someone who doesn't have the disease. And while doing that cures you, it kills the healthy blood donor. That person who doesn't have the disease, that person who volunteers his life is Jesus of Nazareth.

I'm Back

 

Hi!  I'm back after a very long absence. I wish I could tell you it was due to a long period of meditation in the desert, but it was more mundane than that -- illness at the end of 2018 and laziness in getting back on the horse afterwards. But here I am now bursting with ideas. 

Also for the foreseeable future the ERV (Easy to Read Version) will be my Bible because it's such amazingly good translation. Really, really good. I'll still have the NET and other translations nearby in case I need something more precise, but you you'll mostly see the ERV where I quote scripture.

After all this time I don't really expect any of my old readers to remain (Prove me wrong!) so I will probably  have to build up a new reader base. But like I say I have a lot of ideas.

A Hospital, Not a Court

Image by scem.info

"As many times as you sin, repent for your sin; do not become discouraged. And if you sin a second time, repent a second time. Do not be completely deprived of the hope for the proposed goods through indolence. And if you are in the depths of old age and you sin, enter into the church and repent, because the church is a hospital, not a court of justice."

John Chrysostom (349 - 407 CE)
Homilies on Repentance and Almsgiving 3.4.19

Where Did the Devil Get the Name 'Lucifer'?

"How art thou fallen... O Lucifer"

Image: Public Domain

The devil has a lot of names in the Bible. Where did he get the name 'Lucifer' especially since it doesn't appear anywhere in most modern Bible translations? A Quora question.

Q: Who was the true Lucifer and why he was related to the devil if he don’t even appear in the Bible?


A: What a great question! The answer is really in two-parts.

First, we need to recognize that there isn't really any origin story for the Devil in the Bible. There is no place where the scriptures plainly say, "This is the story of the Devil." He's just there -- even in the Garden of Eden if we equate "the serpent" with him.

So, humans being the way we are, people all the way back to the 1st and 2nd centuries BCE searched the Hebrew scriptures for clues to his origin. One place they found that sounded like what they assumed the devil's origin would sound like ("Glorious, supernatural being? Check! Not created evil but became evil through pride? Check!") was in the Old Testament prophetic Book of Isaiah chapter 14, verses 12-32.

This may not be apparent to us today but here is how the ancient church father Origen (185-254 CE) explained it:

It is most clearly proved by these words that he who formerly was Lucifer and who “arose in the morning” has fallen from heaven. For if, as some suppose, he was a being of darkness, why is he said to have formerly been Lucifer or lightbearer? Or how could he “rise in the morning” who had in him no light at all?… So he was light once … when “his glory was turned into dust.” (On First Principles 1.5)

(NOTE: Isaiah actually wrote this prophetic poem to make fun of the King of Babylon, not to explain where Satan came from).

The first line of this passage is the important one for answering your question. In Hebrew this line begins אֵ֛יךְ נָפַ֥לְתָּ מִשָּׁמַ֖יִם הֵילֵ֣ל בֶּן־שָׁ֑חַר Ek Napalta misamayim helel ben sahar (sorry no diacritical marks), literally "How you are fallen from the sky helel, son of dawn." The Hebrew word helel means "shining one." Most scholars believe that this word helel refers to the morning star -- Venus.

The 2nd part of the answer is very brief. The early Christians didn't preach or (for the most part) write in Hebrew, but in Greek. In the Septuagint -- the popular Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures -- helel is translated by the word Eosphoros, meaning "Dawn-carrier." Somehow though that never caught on.

However when the church at Rome asked St. Jerome (347-420 CE) to revise the Old Latin translation, he translated helel as "Lucifer," which means pretty much the same thing as Eosphoros: "light-carrier."

Jerome's translation, the Vulgate, became the official translation of the church. So under the influence of the Vulgate and the widespread idea that Isaiah 14 told the story of where the devil came from, Lucifer became a name for Satan during the middle ages. And influenced by all that, when British translators set out to create an English version of the Bible (i.e., the King James Version) they took over the by now traditional name "Lucifer" in Isaiah 14.12: "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!”

Most modern Bibles translate helel as “shining one,” “Day Star,” “star of the morning” or something else more accurate.

A Sunday Hymn

Nobody gets away with anything. Not even the ones who look like they did.

Why Is the Bible Written?

An ancient scribe writing an ancient book

Image by Guillaume Blanchard

I had a comic book Bible when I was a kid and got a lot out of it, so I thought it was a worthwhile Quora question. 

Q: Why is the Bible written rather than drawn?

A: I kind of wish the biblical authors had added a few illustrations. Instead of his intricate description of his vision of God's throne with its wheels within wheels, it would be easier for me to grasp it with my impressionistic picture-book mind if Ezekiel just said, “And it looked like this,” and drew a picture. We know he could have done it too since a little later in his book he draws a picture of Jerusalem on a clay brick. 

 But the Bible for the most part is didactic literature, which doesn't lend itself well to artistic representation. Euclid may add diagrams to his works on geometry but one doesn't find Seneca or Marcus Aurelius drawing pictures to teach principles of Stoicism. Similarly, it is difficult to imagine the art St. Paul would need to create to accurately convey to the Ephesians that, “By grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God— not the result of works, so that no one may boast.” One would need a comic strip or graphic novel, I would think — a large one to convey even one of Paul's shorter epistles.

 It's also worth noting that most of the tales of Jesus and the Hebrew scriptures got their start as oral traditions. Think of an old man or woman at the campfire at night surrounded by a dozen villagers as they recite the rhythmic creation story or Ruth’s gripping tale. Or an apostle telling well-rehearsed stories of Jesus of Nazareth to a new crop of disciples in a Greek lecture hall. These would have been most naturally preserved later on in written form.

 That's not to say there couldn’t have been artistic representations among the Israelites. They were certainly capable of it. The historical books of the Bible preserve descriptions of large statues of cherubim (composite human-animal creatures depicted throughout the middle east) in the Jerusalem temple along with richly embroidered tapestries of plants and more cherubim. Seal impressions showing animals and decorations have been found by archaeologists. But as in other cultures, such as Assyria, Babylon, Rome, and Greece most devotional and mythological art, as well as some legal texts (e.g., Hammurabi’s code), were done as large public statues, reliefs, paintings, and mosaics where whatever messages they were intended to convey could reach a large audience. Books back then had a more limited reach.

 That’s as far as we know right now, of course. As with all of history, a discovery could be made tomorrow that upends everything.

Noah Questions

Two questions about Noah today. Maybe the floods, hurricanes, and boat rescues is reminding the denizens of Quora (where I usually answer these first) of the Biblical deluge.


Q: Where did the idea of Noah preaching to the people about the flooding come from? I can't seem to find any account of it in the book of Genesis.


A: For Christians this idea may have come from the New Testament book of 2nd Peter 2.5 where Noah is depicted as “a preacher of righteousness… when He [God] brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly.”

Peter and many 1st century Jews would have heard these stories from the midrashic commentaries of the rabbis that elaborated on the stories of the Hebrew scriptures.





Q: How did Noah transport the 87 species of human parasites (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parasites_of_humans)


A: Inside the humans, I would suppose. Except for the parasites that also afflict animals; they might take a different route.

Of course that's presuming that the story of the Deluge is a strictly historical account, as we modern westerners tend to expect, rather than a story probably based on an actual event (Mesopotamia is known to have had some pretty bad floods) and intended to teach the lessons it teaches: monotheism (as opposed to the multitude of panicky gods who can’t even control their own flood in the old Mesopotamian stories), the incorrigible evil in the heart of man, that evil will be judged, that God requires obedience, that, in the end, God forgives and shows mercy, etc., etc.

Oh yeah, and the origin of wine and need to drink responsibly. Very important. ;)

Are Gnostic Gospels Authentic?

A question I was asked back in August:

Q: What is the authenticity of Gnostic Gospels? Couldn't they have been written for selfish interests?

 A: Several Gnostic works claim to record the words or acts of people mentioned in the New Testament such as the apostles Thomas and Phillip, or Mary Magdalene and Judas. If by “authentic” you mean were they written by these people, then the answer is no, they are not authentic. Most scholars believe these books were written in the 2nd and 3rd centuries or later, although the so-called Gospel of Thomas was probably written around AD 100 - 110 and has portions that seem to be traditions from the earliest days of the church.

Could they have been written for selfish interests? Of course, but they also may have been written to publicize their teachings and provide teaching materials for their followers. When these books were written Jesus was just getting famous as the latest ‘mystic master’ in the Roman Empire. Gnosticism had been a tendency of long standing in the Mediterranean world deriving from the platonic teaching that matter is evil and the liberation of one’s soul from matter was the aim in life — and afterlife.

"Christian" Gnostics appeared at the end of the 1st century attempting to link the cache of Jesus’ name with this very popular Platonic philosophic idea. After all, the actual Christian teaching of Jesus and hi apostles with its bloody crucifixion, its ridiculous idea (to Greeks and Romans) of a man returning bodily from death, and its rigorous insistence that no other gods be worshiped — including emperors — was seen as woefully unsophisticated by many.

A Question of Throats

Image by FotoFyl / Erifyli Tsavdari

Sometimes answering anti-Christian questions on Quora doesn't require any special knowledge of biblical scholarship or Jesus' teachings. Sometimes it just requires a little logic. And this time it seemed like some people might take my answer more easily if I approached it the way an evolutionary biologist might, then transpose it into the key of Christian belief. That may make it a bit easier for the questioner to see why we aren't "bothered" by God's design of the human throat.





Q: Why aren't Christians bothered by the fact that God made man with a throat that is used for breathing and eating? It’s a highly inefficient design.

A: From an evolutionary viewpoint, regardless of our opinions of the efficiency of this design, it's widespread development in numerous animal groups (e.g., birds, reptiles, mammals, etc.) suggests that it’s a dependable, tried-and-true mechanism. Although other designs are found in nature (e.g., the spiracles and air sac design found in bees), natural selection has seemingly chosen the ”throat design” for most land animals, including humans.

Therefore Christians who see humans as designed by God needn't worry. Although their God may not have chosen a design favored by modern engineers, he has installed a mechanism in his birds, reptiles, and primates, including humans, that has proven over time to be quite satisfactory.

What Became of the Churches Paul Wrote To

'Church of Mary' in Ephesus, site of the
Third Ecumenical Council in 431

Paul the apostle wrote his part of the New Testament in the form of letters to Christian groups in several cities or areas. Have you ever wondered what became of the churches on those places? Well, some people must (including me) because I received this question on Quora the other day...


Q: Were the churches Paul wrote letters to foundational to post-Biblical Christianity, for example, after Constantine?



A: Rome.

Rome is the most obvious foundational address Paul wrote to. The church father Irenaeus writing around AD 180 described the influence Rome had on post-biblical Christianity:

“For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre-eminent authority,that is, the faithful everywhere,inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [faithful men] who exist everywhere.”

Against Heresies, Book 3, chapters 3-4 Irenaeus

Paul’s other destinations had varying degrees of influence after the apostles were gone. Here is some information I’ve put together on them:

Corinth

The non-biblical (but quite orthodox) letter called 1 Clement was written to Corinth by a Roman church leader (probably before the last New Testament books were finished). This letter shows that the old issues of factionalism and quarreling which Paul had addressed continued among Corinthian Christians; referring to their letters from Paul, Clement rebukes some younger believers who have thrown off the leadership of the elders.

Eerdman’s Dictionary of the Bible, art. Corinth.

Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth around AD 170 wrote a letter preserved in the Church History of Eusebius to the bishop of Rome, Soter, defending the way churches in Achaea traditionally celebrated the feast later called easter, which then was a matter of debate in the church since Rome figured it differently.

Corinth was the capital of the province of Achaea and the bishop there oversaw the smaller churches in the province making him what Orthodox Christians call a metropolitan bishop. Corinth's bishops were present at many of the early church councils and so helped to formulate statements of what Christians do (and do not) believe that are still used to this day.

Metropolis of Corinth - Wikipedia

Galatia

There are actually two areas in modern day Turkey that were called "Galatia" in Paul's time, a north and a south, and no one is certain which one Paul wrote to. If Galatians was sent to north Galatia they would be in the area of Ankara and Pessinus while south Galatia would include Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe where Acts tells us he and Barnabas established churches.

If we go with the southern Galatia theory and look at what roles the cities mentioned in Acts played later on, we can say that Iconium played no important part in later church history, although the apocryphal but popular "Acts of Paul and Thecla" may have been written there "out of love for Paul." Acts of Paul and Thecla - Wikipedia

The church in Antioch was the capital of the province of Pisidia. Partially due to this the bishop there oversaw the smaller churches in the province. The names of many bishops of Pisidian Antioch are recorded and they attended several of the important church Councils.

Antioch of Pisidia - Wikipedia

Lystra did not play a major role in subsequent Christian history, though the foundation of a Byzantine church has been discovered at the site.

Eerdman’s Dictionary of the Bible, art. Lystra

Not much is recorded of Derbe's part in post-apostolic Christianity. The church continued there however and its bishops attended three important Councils: Constantinople (AD 381), Ephesus (AD 431), and Chalcedon (AD 451) Derbe (Diocese) - Wikipedia.

Ephesus

Ephesus is the traditional residence, in later life, of John the Apostle (Eusebius HE 3.1), who was thought to have lived into the reign of Trajan (98-117; Irenaeus Adv. haer. 3.3.4). According to tradition, he wrote his Gospel at Ephesus (HE 5.8.4), and was eventually buried there (3.39.5-6; 5.24.3). The Basilica of St. John was erected on the traditional site of his tomb during the reign of Justinian (527-565). Timothy is remembered as the first bishop of Ephesus (HE 3.4.5), a tradition probably based on 1 Tim. 1:3. Ephesus is also the site for Justin’s dialogue with Trypho the Jew (Dial. 2-8; Eusebius HE 4.18.6).

Eerdman’s Dictionary of the Bible, art. "Ephesus"

The city was destroyed by the Goths in 263, and although rebuilt, the city's importance as a commercial centre declined as the harbour was slowly silted up by the Küçükmenderes River. It was partially destroyed by an earthquake in 614 AD...

The Church of Mary near the harbour of Ephesus was the setting for the Third Ecumenical Council in 431, which resulted in the condemnation of Nestorius. A Second Council of Ephesus was held in 449, but its controversial acts were never approved by the Catholics. It came to be called the Robber Council of Ephesus or Robber Synod of Latrocinium by its opponents.

Wikipedia, art. Ephesus

Philippians

In the second century, Ignatius, bishop of Antioch of Syria, passed through Philippi on his way to Rome to face martyrdom. The Philippian church later sent a letter to Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, requesting his assistance in collecting Ignatius's letters. Polycarp responded favorably to their request in his only letter that has survived (see Pol. Phil. 13.2), though Irenaeus claims that he wrote several others (Irenaeus Haer. 5.33.4). Polycarp's letter (c. the mid-second century A.D.) is helpful in understanding the continuing witness of the church in Philippi in the second century, its concern for those in prison because of their faith and its hospitality. Like Paul, Polycarp also addressed the presbyters (bishops) and deacons (Pol. Phil. 5.2-3; 6.1; cf. Paul's Phil 1:1). In the post-Nicene era, the city became an important Christian center and had a metropolitan bishop.

Dictionary of New Testament Background, art. "Philippi"

Colossae

After a major earthquake in the Lycus Valley that destroyed Colossae and Laodicea (c. A.D. 60-64; Tacitus Ann. 14.27), Colossae was never fully rebuilt, and by the eighth century it was abandoned. The site has not yet been excavated.

Dictionary of New Testament Background, art. "Colossae"

Thessalonica

For centuries the city remained one of the chief strongholds of Christianity, and it won for itself the title of "the Orthodox City," not only by the tenacity and vigor of its resistance to the successive attacks of various barbarous races, but also by being largely responsible for their conversion to Christianity... It was also the scene in 390 AD of the famous massacre ordered by Theodosius the Great, for which St. Ambrose excluded that emperor for some months from the cathedral at Milan.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (2002 edition), art. "Thessalonica"

It still stands today. Thessaloniki - Wikipedia

Jesus at the Hard Rock Cafe

Photo by Paweł Sikora Sikorr

Larry Hurtado who is a favorite Bible scholar of mine and whom my wife, son, and I got to hear lecture recently, is probably the world's leading expert on how exactly Jesus' followers wrapped their minds around what for them psychologically was an utter impossibility: that this guy they knew was actually God. We can go into that sometime.

Another topic he is studying is just how unique in the world the early Christian movement was. He recently wrote a book called Destroyer of the gods:  Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World, where he points out that a lot of what we take for granted about the whole idea of religion came from Jesus' movement, from Christians.  (*Unfortunately Professor Hurtado passed away in 2019).

A little while back he blogged on one example he came across...

______________________  

Passing by the Hard Rock Café in Edinburgh today, I noticed again their slogan: “Love all, serve all,” and noted that it reflects the (likely unconscious) influence of the NT upon western culture.  For the motto self-evidently owes to the sentiments first expressed in NT passages such as Matthew 5:43-48, with its distinctive injunction to “love your enemies” as well as your “neighbour”, and Matthew 20:26 (and Mark 10:43-44), with the striking demand that “whoever would be great among you must be servant of all.”

I suspect, however, that neither the founders (nor the Seminole Indians of Florida who now own the restaurant chain) are aware of this.  It just shows how the values and themes of the NT have now become part of the conceptual “ground water” of western culture.

My recent book, Destroyer of the gods:  Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World (Baylor University Press, 2016) makes the points that early Christianity (in the first three centuries) had distinctive features, and that these once-distinctive features have now become cultural commonplaces for us.  I don’t refer to the Hard Rock Café or its slogan, but there’s lots of other (and, hopefully, more interesting) stuff that I hope will address our “cultural amnesia.

Those Mysterious Dead Sea Scrolls

The War Scroll

Courtesy of Matson Photo Service 

Have you ever wondered what's really in those Scrolls? Yes, the Bible but what else? Yesterday someone asked me this on Quora. True, it's not "Christ and him crucified" but the Dead Sea Scrolls are still cool. They give us an idea of what was going on in the background while Jesus and his students trod the dusty pathways of Judea.

________________________

Q: What are the other books that were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls besides the books of the Old Testament?

A: Of the 944 scrolls found at Qumran, 211 are “biblical” and 733 are “nonbiblical.” This latter group contains all sorts of writings. For example books from the Pseudepigrapha were found such as Jubilees and 1 Enoch along with apocalyptic books related to Enoch, such as The Book of Giants (1Q23) and Melchizedek (11Q13). (FYI, the notations with a Q in them tell you what cave they were found in and the manuscript number. This is how scholars denominate the different scrolls and fragments. “Etc.” after a notation just means there are too many copies to list them all).

There are numerous songs and liturgies thanking God for his deliverances, while other psalms claiming to be authored by David and Solomon are for exorcising demons causing various ailments, such as a "fever demon" or a "chest-pain demon." The Psalms Scroll contains not just the biblical psalms but a number of others, some of which were already known from different sources while others were entirely new to us.

The community that produced the scrolls (we’re not as sure it was the Essenes nowadays) penned several scriptural commentaries using a particular type of interpretation called "pesher" so as to find themselves featured in the Hebrew scriptures. The Commentary on Habakkuk (1QpHab) is an example of this. They also wrote directly about themselves, producing procedures and regulations such as the Rule of the Community, The Halakhic Letter, and the Damascus Document. There are many copies of these, and Damascus Document was originallly found in the 19th century all the way up in Syria, long before additional copies were discovered among the scrolls.

They produced their own apocalyptic prophecies, the most famous of which is The War Scroll which details the final battle between "the Sons of Light" and "the Sons of darkness." Wisdom literature has been found, including Wiles of the Wicked Woman (4Q184), Mysteries (1Q27, etc), and Instruction (1Q26, etc.). A copy of Sirach (aka Ecclesiasticus), which has long been known through the apocrypha, was there. A set of beatitudes, rather different from Jesus', was discovered there too (4Q525).

This really just scrapes the surface but should give you an idea of what was found besides the biblical texts.

The Dead Sea Scrolls Digital Library has all the scrolls and intends to provide complete transcriptions and translations in the future.

Two excellent translations of the nonbiblical scrolls are The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated by Florentino Garcia Martinez, and The Dead Sea Scrolls: A New Translation by M. Wise, M. Abegg, and E. Cook.

Production Note: Continuing On

Photo by Onomatomedia

So, as I told my Facebook page members last week (which you can 'Like' and 'Follow' by clicking here if you have the notion, although I think you may need to join Facebook first. But who hasn't joined Facebook, right?) I am going to finish up the three series I have running on this page. That would be Life After Death, The Great Announcement (about what the Gospel really is), and the Trinity. And partly due to the death of my father last year, contemplating which is part of the reason I haven't posted since January (well, that and probate), I plan first to dive back into the subject of Life After Death.

If you'd like to catch up with that series you can  Part 1, Part 1.5 (aka A Revelation About Revelation), and Part 2.

Part 3 is still "in progress" and won't appear right away so until it does (which won't be long) I will be sure to post other interesting things. For instance, tomorrow I'll answer a question someone asked me just the other day: What was in the Dead Sea Scrolls besides Old Testament books...?

Who Rules?

Photo credit: Hugo Heikenwaelder

The world and all that is in it is mine, (Psalm 50.12).

________________________

This is my Father’s world:

Oh, let me ne’er forget
That though the wrong seems oft so strong,
God is the ruler yet.
This is my Father’s world,
The battle is not done:
Jesus who died shall be satisfied,
And earth and Heav’n be one.

This Is My Father’s World,  Maltbie D. Babcock, 1901

Everything is New

Happy New Years!

The ultimate New Years resolution (and the importance of keeping it, according to John Chrysostom).

"When anyone is in Christ, it is a whole new world. The old things are gone; suddenly, everything is new!"  (2 Corinthians 5.17, ERV )

_________________

Tell me, if we see new heavens and other portions of his creation, is there a profit in this which can match the benefit we gain from seeing a man converted from evil to virtue and changing from the side of error to that of truth? This is what the blessed Paul called a new creature, and so immediately he went on to say: “The former things have passed away; behold, they are all made new!” By this he briefly showed that those who, by their faith in Christ, had put off like an old cloak the burden of their sins, those who had been set free from their error and been illumined by the light of justification, had put on this new and shining cloak, this royal robe. This is why he said: “If any man is in Christ, he is a new creature: the former things have passed away; behold, they are all made new.”  

I exhort you, therefore, both you who have previously been initiated and you who have just now enjoyed the Master’s generosity, let us all listen to the exhortation of the apostle, who tells us: “The former things have passed away; behold, they are all made new.” Let us forget the whole past and, like citizens in a new world, let us reform our lives, and let us consider in our every word and deed the dignity of him who dwells within us. 

John Chrysostom (AD c. 344–407)

Baptismal Instructions 4.12, 16 (Ancient Christian Writers: The Works of the Fathers in Translation. Mahwah, N.J.: Paulist, 1946-.:71-72)

Peter & Paul: Conflicting Gospels?

Peter and Paul
(4th century carving)

(A Quora question I answered yesterday.)

Q: Did Peter and Paul preach conflicting gospels or messages?

A: Not really. Both Peter and Paul preached the same gospel of the Kingdom of God that Jesus preached: That God’s universal kingdom had been inaugurated at the cross with Jesus as its king, that everyone was invited to give him their allegiance and join (at which point their sins would be wiped away).

The disagreement came about when some Jewish members asked, “But… don’t you have to become a Jew first?” The answer, hammered out at the Jerusalem Conference (c. AD 49), was, “No.”

It’s hard to understand just what an earthquake this was to the Jewish believers. They were the chosen people. The Messiah had come from them. Paul gives an entire list of “advantages” that the Jews had in the Letter to the Romans. That pagan gentiles could just waltz into the family of God on exactly the same terms as the Jewish people was extremely difficult for some to wrap their minds around. Some (often called “Judaizers” by scholars) never did, and roamed the Mediterranean world trying to convince members of the Christian movement that they needed to become Jews (via being circumcised, observing the Sabbath, and adopting other rituals) for their conversions to be valid.

Paul stood up to judaizing teachers wherever he encountered them because they were putting unnecessary obstacles in the way of followers of Jesus.

Peter

Peter, to his credit, got this. In fact, the Book of Acts portrays him as being among the first to get it. Paul attests to this himself in his Letter to the Galatians, where he describes how Peter was happy to eat with Gentiles in the city of Antioch, and even,“live[d] like a Gentile and not like a Jew.” “Table fellowship” was much more than just eating food in the ancient near east; it meant you accepted and respected the people you were with.

But, rather in line with his character as the Gospels describe him, Peter got spooked by men from “the circumcision party” who arrived from and withdrew his table fellowship with the gentile members. Paul roundly chewed him out for that.

But there is no evidence of any significant difference in the gospel Paul and Peter proclaimed, other that what is mentioned right before the Antioch incident in Galatians: “I (Paul) had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles).

On the Other Side of Christmas

Stoning of St. Stephen, by Rembrandt

Even though it's not technically connected with Christmas, yesterday -- the first day after Christmas -- is the day many of Jesus' followers for centuries commemorated the execution of Stephen, the Christian Movement's first martyr. Perhaps it's just a coincidence that Stephen is remembered here, but it serves as a none-too-subtle reminder that the Messiah wasn't born to bring us bright baubles and candy canes; this is serious business.

Let's rehearse what happened here. The powers-brokers back then were not terribly happy with Jesus' early followers. Stephen was one of the major exponents of what we stood for and, as the story goes, when his opponents couldn't out-debate him they simply accused him of "speaking blasphemous words against Moses and God." In short order Stephen was "seized and brought... before the Council," (Acts of the Apostles, chapter 6 verses 11 - 12).

In his defense Stephen delivered a long and rather blunt speech showing point by point that his people had an abysmal record of obeying God and now had capped it off by crucifying their own Messiah. His listeners did not take it well:

When those in the council meeting heard this, they became very angry. They were so mad they were grinding their teeth at him. But Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit. He looked up into heaven and saw the glory of God. And he saw Jesus standing at God’s right side. Stephen said, “Look! I see heaven open. And I see the Son of Man standing at God’s right side.” 

Everyone there started shouting loudly, covering their ears with their hands. Together they all ran at Stephen. They took him out of the city and began throwing stones at him. The men who told lies against Stephen gave their coats to a young man named Saul. As they were throwing the stones at him, Stephen was praying. He said, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!” He fell on his knees and shouted, “Lord, don’t blame them for this sin!” 

These were his last words before he died.

(Acts of the Apostles, chapter 7 verses 54 - 60, ERV)

One may fault Stephen for tactlessness but not for lack of courage. Jesus offered his people a revolutionary way to be rescued from Rome, rescued from sin, rescued from failing repeatedly to fulfill the mission God had created them for. Even at this late date, when they had utterly failed to recognize their Messiah and turned him over to the Romans for a hideous execution, Jesus' offer still stood. Israel could still fall in behind their King. Stephen saw his duty clear and decided his best shot at shaking up the august leaders of his people was to rub their noses in the truth of what they'd done.

It got him killed, with many more to come.

On this day we are reminded that the line of martyrs with Stephen at its head has by no means come to an end, as dozens of Jesus' people are blown up in Egypt for celebrating his birth. Meanwhile in China Christians are routinely kidnapped and tortured.

In the comfortable, hermetically sealed western world we inhabit it's easy to assume the days of Christians being martyred for their faith is long past, that it may have happened back in "barbaric" Roman times, but not today. It's particularly easy when we are warm and full from the traditional holiday buying binge.

The Feast of Stephen helps us remember right after Christmas that that's not quite the case.

Merry Christmas From the Rebellion

What an invasion looks like

And so the child has been born, the King has arrived, and the invasion has begun. From that day in Bethlehem to our own, this revolution has continued. Following the example of our Master's own subversive activities, we deploy the full power of self-sacrificial love against war, hunger, poverty, suffering, pride, hate, cruelty, oppression, greed and the spiritual forces of evil behind them. 

And, like our earliest ancestors in the Christian movement, we spread that simple, innately powerful message, the joyful Great Announcement that "the Lord has come, let Earth receive her King!"

We have not always fared terribly well as we carried out our mission. Many, many of our brothers and sisters in the struggle all throughout the world are not doing well right now. But we've been warned of this from the beginning, and we are not afraid.

"I have told you these things," Jesus of Nazareth told us long ago, "so that in me you may have peace. In the world you have trouble and suffering, but take courage—I have conquered the world!" (Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 33).

But we press on. Because Christmas is not only a day of gifts, conviviality, and good cheer.  Christmas is a rebellion. 

A very happy Christmas (all 12 days) to everyone out there reading this!

Advent - The King on Your Doorstep

The True King arrives

The special child will be born.
    God will give us a son
who will be responsible for leading the people.
His name will be “Wonderful Counselor,
     Powerful God,
     Father Who Lives Forever,
     Prince of Peace.”
His power will continue to grow,
     and there will be peace without end.
This will establish him as the king
     sitting on David’s throne
     ruling his kingdom.
He will rule with goodness and justice
     forever and ever.
The strong love that the Lord All-Powerful has for his people
will make this happen!

Book of the Prophet Isaiah, chapter 9 verses 6-7, (ERV)

Advent, as we observed when we began these reflections four weeks ago, originally meant the arrival of a king. And just as the subjects of Rome long ago would have gone to great lengths to get everything ready for Caesar Augustus, Advent is a season of preparation for the coming of our King, Jesus of Nazareth.

Early tomorrow, while the sky is still dark (if tradition is any guide), the King will finally arrive. Not with a vast entourage of hangers on, not with all the opulent glory of an imperial ruler, but in obscurity and poverty and dirt. It still seems odd to us today, doesn't it? 2000 years have come and gone since Jesus' birth and we are quite familiar with this story. But we still instinctively associate luxury and showiness with importance and true power. When a world leader makes a gesture toward humility we do find it charming, but it would seem strange to us if they lived in a small apartment and ate cup-a-soup (although since I posted an earlier version of this essay one doing just that has turned up).

But the High King of the universe did live humbly from beginning to end, and he did it by choice.

I've come back to this dichotomy repeatedly throughout these little essays because it confronts me with a question: If God is like that when he comes to Earth, then what should I be like? If out of all the possible options he could have chosen he chose this one -- melding with and living among the poor and downtrodden -- then, out of all possible options available today, how should I live?

Tonight, for somewhere around the 2000th time, the High King comes again as a baby in that insect-infested manger, while his poverty-stricken parents and shell-shocked shepherds look on.

What does he want of us this time? Will we respond this year? Will we join his revolution?

*          *          *

Prayer: Our King, let us bow down at your makeshift crib with your poor, intrepid parents and worship you. And then help us to rise up and follow you wheresoever you may lead us. In the name of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, we pray. Amen.

Book of Isaiah, chapter 9 verses 6 - 7, Common English Bible

Advent, as we observed when we began these reflections four weeks ago, originally meant the arrival of a king. And just as the subjects of Rome long ago would have gone to great lengths to get everything ready for Caesar Augustus, Advent is a season of preparation for the coming of our King, Jesus of Nazareth.

Early tomorrow, while the sky is still dark (if tradition is any guide), the King will finally arrive. Not with a vast entourage of hangers on, not with all the opulent glory of an imperial ruler, but in obscurity and poverty and dirt. It still seems odd to us today, doesn't it? 2000 years have come and gone since Jesus' birth and we are quite familiar with this story. But we still instinctively associate luxury and showiness with importance and true power. When a world leader makes a gesture toward humility we do find it charming, but it would seem strange to us if they lived in a small apartment and ate cup-a-soup (although since I posted an earlier version of this essay one doing just that has turned up).

But the High King of the universe did live humbly from beginning to end, and he did it by choice.

I've come back to this dichotomy repeatedly throughout these little essays because it confronts me with a question: If God is like that when he comes to Earth, then what should I be like? If out of all the possible options he could have chosen he chose this one -- melding with and living among the poor and downtrodden -- then, out of all possible options available today, how should I live?

Tonight, for somewhere around the 2000th time, the High King comes again as a baby in that insect-infested manger, while his poverty-stricken parents and shell-shocked shepherds look on.

What does he want of us this time? Will we respond this year? Will we join his revolution?

*          *          *

Prayer: Our King, let us bow down at your makeshift crib with your poor, intrepid parents and worship you. And then help us to rise up and follow you wheresoever you may lead us. In the name of Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, we pray. Amen.