The New Testament in 90 Days

This is another one of those short letters that some people think Paul might not have authored (but some people think he did).  Some scholars date this letter slightly later because of some of the concerns named:  false teachers and doctrines, particularly preaching harsh ascetic practices.  Paul writes in part in order to counter these claims and re-assert the claims of the gospel. Again, I'm struck by Paul's expansive gospel and Jesus:  "All things were created by him, both in the heavens and the earth."  This is a view of Christ that goes beyond the man Jesus who walked on this earth.  Jesus is God-incarnate, and he was around from the beginning of creation.  The gospel is God's secret plan from the beginning of time, now made manifest in the crucified and Risen Christ.  It was a secret, but it is a secret no longer, not since Jesus rose from the dead. It's possible that Paul speaks this way because he is countering the claims of another re...

Now we turn the corner into chapter 3 of Philippians.  I have to admit that this chapter is memorable to me for at least one reason:  my uncle (amateur theologian) used to use it as an example of the colorful, earthy language in the Bible.  In chapter three Paul is trying to describe that it is really true, he is really willing to give up everything, everything, for the sake of knowing Jesus and being found in him.  He's not just willing to give up his sins and the things that weigh him down, but even the things he thought were valuable, his birthright as a Jew, his righteousness under the law.  All these, Paul says, he counts as "loss" or "rubbish", compared to Christ.  Except that he doesn't use the word "rubbish."  He uses the Greek equivalent of the word "shit."  At least, that's what my uncle told me, when I was an impressionable age.  (and now that I have studied Greek, I have discovered that he is right).  "We try to make ...

These four short chapters Paul writes to the Philippians while he is in prison somewhere.  Some people think he is I'm prison in Rome, other suspect an earlier imprison meant.  The church in Philippi, which is not a wealthy community, has sacrificed several times in order to send Pau help, and this letter is a thank you note. For a man in prison, Paul is in incredibly good spirits.  He puts a good construction even on those who oppose him (those who are preaching Christ, but not from good motives( saying to the Philippians that it matters not what the motives are, only that people are preaching and hearing the gospel.  While he is imprisoned, he also encourages them, for he considers that they too live in difficult circumstances (their poverty) and he tells them to look to Christ as they live together in community.  So they are to serve each other, becomes slaves to one another, as Christ became a slave to us, in order to set us free. Remember in Ephesians, ...

In the second half of Ephesians, Paul (or one of his disciples) writes about what this expansive vision of the grace of God means for the community life of the Ephesians (and everyone...) "live a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called", he begins, and he goes on to paint a picture of what that will look like.  Humility and patience, compassion and truthfulness -- and most of all, striving for unity, because there is only One Lord, One Baptism, One Faith, even though it looks so much different sometimes ( some things never change).  There seem to be many factions and warning sects in the church (much to our detriment, Paul understands), but in reality, there is only one Bod you Christ.  Speak the truth, but speak in Love.  Work together.  Come out of the darkness and into the light.  Forgive each other. Easy words to understand, perhaps.  Harder to do, certainly. Especially when Paul uses the words, "Be imitators of God, as beloved...

One thing you might notice about the letter to the Ephesians right away is that, unlike Galatians and both of the letters to Corinth, Paul has almost nothing personal or specific to say to the church at Ephesus.  that has led some people to speculate that this short letter really was not written to the Ephesians, but was a letter more generally circulated to all of the churches.  It has led others to speculate that Paul did not actually write it, but that instead it was written by one of his disciples.  (it would not have been a terrible thing in those days to write a letter "in the name of" one of your teachers.) So this letter doesn't have juicy details about the sins of the Ephesians, or greetings to individuals that we want to know more about, except Tychicus (Darn).  But it does have (and you'll just have to trust me on this) those really really long sentences that Paul is famous for (you can tell this especially if you read the original Greek).  I believ...

That's the question Paul has for the Galatians.  Do you want to be free, or do you want to be slaves?  He is angry with them because he told them the truth, he spoke the Gospel to them, and God set them free, and he thinks that they want to be slaves again. Freedom. What does it mean? Freedom is a loaded word in our culture.  We are the "land of the free and the home of the brave."  Paul wants the Galatians to be free, free in Christ, which is not "freedom to do anything you want", even though he speaks of "freedom from the demands of the law."  Freedom in Christ is freedom from:  freedom from fear that we are not acceptable to God; freedom from keeping the law in  a slavish way.  but it is also freedom to:  freedom to love our neighbor, freedom to love God, freedom for love, joy, peace, patience, and all of the other fruit of the Spirit. Someone wants the Galatians to be circumcized.  Paul thinks that these "Judaizers" believe i...

Paul begins chapter 3 in the same exasperated tone he's been using from the beginning of Galatians.  It's possible, I suppose, to read the whole letter in this same tone, but it seems to me that he calms down just a bit as he tries to explain to the Galatians the difference between the law and the promise. He begins, now with Jesus, but with Abraham.  Abraham first received the promise, the promise that he and his family would be blessed.  Later on, that family would become the people of Israel.  They would be freed from slavery and lead through the wilderness to the promised land.  In the middle of their wilderness wandering they were given the law.  But the covenant is not based on the law.  It is based on that original promise, given to Abraham, and it is received by faith. The promise is prior to the law, Paul argues.  The law did not come about until 430 years after the promise was given to Abraham.  Therefore the promise has precede...

The book of Galatians in short (only 6 chapters) and Paul doesn't have time to be subtle.  so, after brief, perfunctory greetings, he gets right to the point: What the heck is wrong with them? Why are they abandoning the gospel he preaching to them? That's what he has been hearing.  Since Paul has left the church in Galatia, others have come, and have been telling the Galatians that trust in Jesus death and resurrection is not enough to be considered a follower of Jesus.  They also need to be circumcized, and keep the law.  This Paul emphatically rejects.  And he is angry that it is so easy for them to desert the gospel, and cling, instead, to the law. These false teachers are often called "Judaizers."  While Paul is careful not to tell the Galatians that the law is bad, he wants them to know that the law does not save them.  (this was actually never the point of the law.)  Paul tells the Galatians that the other apostles agreed with him o...

So we are drawing to the close of Paul's 2nd Letter to the Corinthians (though some people think it is actually portions of two different letters( and Paul is ratcheting up his rhetoric in the face of the competition:  the super-apostles.  Whether the problem is that those super-apostles are there, on the ground, or that the super-apostles just seem so, well, super:  strong, without flaw, awe-inspiring charismatic, inspiring -- or perhaps, all of the above, I don't know.  But Paul's  reputation among the Corinthians suffers b            y comparison.  He doesn't speak as well as they do  He doesn't cut as fine a swath as they do.  He does not have the mega-churches or large crowds that they do. So, what does Paul really have to brag about? Plenty, as it turns out. He can bring about the hardships and persecution that he has endured (and he does).  He can bring about how much he loves them (and he does). ...

A good portion of these chapters is taken up with the offering that Paul is bringing to Jerusalem, and that he hopes the Corinthians will contribute generously to.  In Macedonia, they astonished Paul with their generosity, and it might seem that he is shaming the Corinthians (a somewhat wealthier congregation) to do their part.  it is not that they are not going to give anything; he wants them to (cheerfully )give generously, not just a little. Paul goes back and forth -- give generously, he tells them.  But then he will say, but I'm not saying you should give above your means, just what is appropriate.  Then again, "God loves a cheerful giver."  But again, it's not what you don't have that counts, but what you DO have.  He doesn't seem to want them to give out of guilt or compulsion, but freely, but this is really really important to him.  He wants it to be important to them. I think I understand this.  I want people in my congregation to giv...

I'll admit it:  embedded in these three chapters of 2nd Corinthians are sine if nt favorite verses in the New Testament. "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation; everything old has passed away; everything has become new." "For the love of Christ controls us, for we are convinced that one has died for all; therefore all have died." "We have this treasure in clay jars so that the awesome power belongs to God and doesn't come from us." Paul is unleashing persuasive powers on the Corinthians.  In his first letter, he admonished them; now he's trying to paint a picture of the riches of the gospel, in order to convince them of the beauty and truth of the message he brings. It seems that Paul still has competition for respect among the Corinthians; he still has to make his case that he ought to be listened to and respected as an apostle.  But it also appears that his warnings have borne fruit; he believes that even though h...

So after Paul writes a somewhat critical letter to the church at Corinth, he decides not to visit them again just yet, but instead writes to them again.  He begins by, again and again, speaking of the comfort of God in times of persecution and trouble.  These are verses we not read often at funerals (at least in my Lutheran tradition).  Paul is speaking of one who brings the promise of God's comfort in Christ to people and one who has been through trouble and needs comfort himself.  He and his companions have been through hardships of many kinds in their missionary journeys. One of the reasons Paul is delaying, though,  has to do with that other letter he wrote to Corinth, the one in which he was critical of them.  It is clear (and will become clear as this letter goes on) that Paul feels that the Corinthians are unfairly mistrustful of him, and he needs to re-assert his credentials as an apostle.  He does have their best interests at heart.  He...

Finally, Paul gets to another controversy that the Corinthians are involved in:  whether the dead are raised or not.  Apparently this is another disagreement that the Corinthians have, and Paul meets it head-on, and ends up with one of the most beautiful (and oft-quoted) chapters in the New Testament. It appears that the Corinthians do believe that Jesus was raised from the dead, because one of the arguments that Paul uses is that, if you aren't raised from the dead, that means that Jesus wasn't raised either.  He also appeals to the witnesses to the resurrection:  Cephas (Peter), the Twelve, 500 disciples, James, and then, finally, to Paul.  (Not that when he sees Jesus on the road to Damascus, it is more like a vision, but it is still proof to him that Jesus has been raised.) he's what I don't like about Paul:  he doesn't mention Mary Magdalene, or any of the other women.  Nothing.  Is it because women are considered to be unreliable witness...

If you want to know something about what the church as "the body of Christ" means, you want to read first Corinthians 12.  There Paul uses a metaphor for the body politic for the Christian community.  It was common to talk about the community, the city, the state as a "body", where there were many members, and where each member had a part.  So Paul wants the Corinthians to consider that they are united in one common purpose, even though they are diverse in gifts.  Paul, of course (as always) tweaks the metaphor so that the weaker members of the body have greater honor. And then he puts all of the talk about the body in the context of spiritual gifts, gifts given to the Corinthians, but for the common good.  that seems to be a growing edge (Or "weakness") for the Corinthians, who love spiritual gifts, the glitz and glamour of them, but don't seem to get the idea that the purpose of gifts is to share and to build up the body, rather than to divide and ...

Now Paul starts giving advice with regard to eating meat sacrificed to idols, one of the many controversies of the Corinthian church.  Again, there is a difference between theory and practice.  In theory, there are free to eat meat sacrificed to idols, because they realize that the idol is not real, and the meat is "just meat"; there is nothing especially holy or unholy about it. BUT, Paul writes, if there are people for whom eating meat causes them to doubt, who wonder if they are sinning when they eat it, or whose consciences are bothering them, then we should be willing to abstain so that we don't shake their faith.  Again, what is important is how our actions affect our neighbor. (I wonder what modern day dilemmas we could apply Paul's logic to:  what actions should we be careful about, for the sake of our neighbors?  It is worth thinking about.) Now Paul addresses the issue of compensation for apostles.  He seems to be arguing that he has a right...

Or at least, that's what it seems like, reading Paul's next three chapters.  They've been staying up late in Corinth, and engaging in some actions that some people won't do.  And even if they aren't all behaving immorally, they are not calling into account one of their own who is (ahem) sleeping with his father's wife, for example. The Corinthians brag that they are free -- they are free, right?  That means that they cane do whatever they want, right?  Paul is all for freedom, but thinks that the Corinthians might have misunderstood him.  He thinks that they have become arrogant; they have let some success in spiritual matters go to their heads, and it has affected their vision with regard to their behavior toward one another as well. (This reminds me a little of the arrogance of the Enron executives right before its fall.  They were so drunk with their financial success that they lost their moral compass.) The Corinthians are wayward not only in...

I like the first letter to the Corinthians.  I think one of the reasons that I like it is that it's very clear, in this letter, that Paul knows these people, that Paul knows this congregation, and that he is responding to very specific issues that have arisen in the community.  Even though it's helpful to read background notes about the people in Corinth, you can figure out some of what is going on without doing any background reading, because you can just tell from the kinds of things Paul is talking about.  It's like reading other's people's mail, something no one should do, but perhaps something we are tempted to do on occasion, just out of curiosity. So, what's going on in Corinth? People are fighting, for one thing.  People are playing favorites, jockeying for position saying "I'm a better Christian than you are because such-and-such baptized me."  There are factions based on leadership, and who is the best public speaker (possibly Apollos...

The letter to the Romans ends with Paul weighing in on what seems to be a local controversy.  There are some among the Christians in Rome who are careful about what they eat, who practice abstinence of certain foods, and feel that this is part of how they are faithful.  There are others who feel that freedom in Christ means that they can eat anything they want to.  Paul seems to agree, in theory anyway, with those who feel that they can eat anything.  But "in theory" is a loaded phrase.  Paul tells the Christian community in Rome that just because they are free to eat anything, doesn't mean it's a good idea, especially if it's going to be harmful to the faith of their brothers and sisters. So, what kind of food is Paul talking about?  Is he talking about people who keep kosher?  Is he talking about people who eat food which has been sacrificed to idols?  Or are there different dietary restrictions?  I don't know. But what is interesting t...

In different ways, both chapter 12 and 13 are about how to live as a follower of Jesus in the world as it is.  They seem very different in some ways.  Chapter 12 is a soaring vision with practical and impractical advice (let love be genuine; hate what is evil; hold fast to what is good) and Chapter 13 seems more practical, dealing as it does with the relationship of the early Christians with civil authorities. In chapter 12, Paul casts a vision of a the transformed life and a transformed community.  He begins by speaking about the gifts people will share in this transformed community.  And then he goes on toe share a laundry list of Christian excellence:  genuine love, hospitality to strangers, service to others.  Giving to the needs of the saints.  Associating with the lowly.  This is what transformed lives look like.  And though it is easy for us to read the list and consider these are individual virtues (that is the way we think of most ...

Paul is Jewish.  Paul is a disciples of Jesus.  Paul loves Judaism.  Paul loves Jesus.  In chapters 9, 10 and 11, Paul tries to speak about all of these things in a way that is true to God's promises through Jesus, but also true to God's faithfulness to Israel as the chosen people. One of Paul's statements is that God chooses the ones he chooses, and hardens the hearts of others, and who knows why.  An imaginary opponent poses the question, "How can God blame someone for a hard heart, if he hardens the heart?"  Good question. Paul has nothing but praise for his Jewish brothers and sisters' zeal and how religious they are.  He respects them, an doesn't really have any idea why most of his brothers and sisters have not joined him in the community of Jesus. But, Paul asserts:  God chooses.  God chose Abraham, and Jacob, ad Joseph.  And God is choosing now, and is choosing Gentiles to also be a part of his chosen people.  God is i...

Perhaps chapter 7 of Romans confuses you somewhat.  I find the sentence structures convoluted, and it seems like (at times anyway) that Paul is really struggling to say what he wants to say.  The, for a moment, it becomes clear.  then, it's a struggle again. Since Paul is talking about the relationship between sin and the law, between our desire for God and our temptations to do evil, perhaps it's understandable that his language sounds like a struggle.  Because there's a struggle going on inside us:  the struggle to do good,  the knowledge that we have done evil, and our guilt before God. Many people have assumed that what Paul is writing is a sort of confessional, that he is saying, "this is what it was like for me before I followed Jesus."  But actually, he is not writing about himself, but his "I" is meant to be EveryMan.  He is not telling his story; he is telling all of our stories.  We are in bondage to sin, struggling to do the ri...

In the next three chapters are three different models for us.  In Chapter 4 we meet Abraham, the father of Israel, the father of the circumcised, the one who originally head God, and set out on a journey to a place he had never been before.  Paul makes the argument that Abraham is the father not just of Israel, not just of the circumcised, but of all who trust God's faithfulness.  Didn't God's call to Abraham (and Abraham's answer) precede his circumcision?  Paul asks.  (Yes).  Well, then, it's not circumcision that makes the difference but it is faith in God.  It is trust in Christ's faithfulness, not whether we meet a particular legal requirement, that makes the difference. Before we meet the next model (Adam), there is that wonderful portion of Romans 5 that shows us the consequences of trusting in Christ's faithfulness:  peace with God.  This peace transcends our circumstances, builds character, and gives meaning to our suffering, becau...

Have you eaten a good breakfast?  Are you sitting down and ready to think deeply?  We are out of the stories of Jesus and the Apostles now and into the deep theology of the letters of Paul.  Romans is the longest, and the deepest, and the most systematic of these letters.  I wish we had more than a few days to read the whole thing. Most of Romans actually doesn't read much like a letter.  It sounds more like a treatise.  Paul is on his way to Rome, but on the way he is collecting an important offering from his Gentile churches to the Jewish believers in Jerusalem, an important symbol of unity between the two bodies of believers.  In the meantime, he's writing to Rome to share his faith with Gentile believers, at least in part to help them to live with, and be good witnesses to, their Jewish brothers and sisters.  As it is, there is much misunderstanding between them. Paul is writing this letter to a church has has never met ( that is not the c...

So this is the final installment in the book of the Acts of the Apostles.  Paul testifies convincingly to King Agrippa.  In fact, in some translations, he says that he is "almost persuaded" to become a follower of "The Way."  But, not quite.  Paul shares his testimony, his former life as a Pharisee, how he came to believe in Jesus, and what he is doing now.  King Agrippa is almost persuaded.  Others shout that Paul has gone crazy (from too much learning, they say).  Everyone agrees, though, that there is not reason for Paul to be arrested.  He could be released. If only he hadn't appealed to Rome. So Paul sets out, as a prisoner, for Rome.  It's late to make the sea journey, and Paul (who comes off just a little as a know-it-all) warns them that they will run into trouble.  Which they do.  Paul becomes a leader, encouraging and supporting the crew and the other prisoners, blessing food for a meal (which sounds a lot like a commu...

To be honest with you, I would have liked it much better if Paul had given his powerful testimony of conversion on the road to Damascus, and the result was that everybody (or most everybody) (or a large group of people, anyway) was convinced and convicted by his story, and changed their hearts.  Or, at least, decided not to to kill him. But that's not what happened.  The plot thickens.  Paul tells everyone about what a good Jew he was, and is, and how he was on the way to persecute Christians, and the blinding light, and the voice, and how the Jewish believer Ananais came to him and restored his sight. It's such a powerful testimony that the voices rise up, "He deserves to die!"  Which is what they already thought. I always think that our stories are so powerful, more powerful than statistics.  Statistics don't convince people, but stories do.  And that is true -- sometimes.  Other times, we have our minds so made up already that the most moving ...

This is where it's a good idea to start looking at a map, to keep track of the towns Paul travels through, the seas he sails through, as well as the people he meets.  At the beginning of chapter 19, Paul is traveling through Ephesus and meets some believers who have not yet received the Holy Spirit.  Not only that, they haven't even heard of the existence of the Holy Spirit.  He prays for them, and immediately they begin to speak in other languages and prophecy. Coincidentally, there are "about" twelve of them.  Hmmmm. In the meantime, things are not going so smoothly in the synagogues.  There are people who are convinced about Paul's message, but many more who are not.  One small, odd story concerns some exorcists who do not appear to believe in Jesus, but who like to cast our evil spirits in his name.  At one point, the spirits ask the exorcists, "Jesus I know, and Paul I am familiar with, but who are you" Personally, the very small detail abou...

Paul and his companions have dodged a bulletin with church-dividing implications.  The Gentile and Jewish believers have found a way to be in fellowship with one another.  Still, Paul and Barnabas somehow couldn't fix a rift that developed between the two of them.  We really don't know much about the rift, except that it had to do with John Mark.  Barnabas wanted to take him along with them; Paul did not.  On the basis of something as simple as this, Paul and Barnabas part ways.  Paul teams up with Silas, and eventually Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman and a Greek father (interesting that he has Timothy circumcised because of the company with whom he expected to be traveling). It's sort of sad that the church could come to an agreement with respect to the first controversial issues they faced, but that Paul and Barnabas couldn't come to an agreement with regard to John Mark.  But that's the way it is in churches sometimes, isn't it?  It is the...

The Spirit keeps sending the church out, to Antioch, and every farther out.  Paul, Barnabas and john Mark head down to Seleucid, to Cyprus, and to Paphos and Perga, preaching in the synagogues and then going out to tell the Gentiles as well. Paul preaches a sermon telling the basic story about Jesus.  He meets with success at first, but later on, some of the other Jewish leaders come in with questions, and their success is diminished.  This is the pattern wherever Paul goes, whenever he goes out into the world;  he always goes to the synagogue first, and then later on, they go out to the Gentiles. There's an interesting story in chapter 13 about a false prophet named bar-Jesus.  Bar-Jesus is rebuked and he goes blind.  It does make me wonder about others who might be around claiming to be the messiah. Even when Paul meets with success, there are complications.  First example, Paul heals a man in Lystra, and then has to deal with the problem that ...

There's a turning point in this chapter, and it begins with two men praying and seeing angels and having visions.  First, there is Cornelius, a pious Gentile, who is praying at around three in the afternoon (one of the hours of prayer, by the way), when he sees an angel who tells him to go and summon a man named Simon (who he never met).  This Simon will tell him Something. In the meantime, Peter is also praying.  It is noon (another hour of prayer) and he sees a vision while he is on the roof.  In the vision, he sees a sheet full of animals that are considered unclean by Jewish law.  The voice in the vision says to Peter, "Get up!  Kill and eat!"  Peter refuses, but the voice persists.  "Never consider unclean what God has made pure." Peter does receive a visitor, who invites him to Cornelius' home.  He finds a surprising welcome when he gets there.  There are many people waiting for him, waiting for the word that he will give him. ...

So, the rest of Stephen's story.  He preaches a rousing sermon, and gives a summary of salvation history, starting with Abraham and ending with Jesus.  And he calls them stubborn and unrepentant, totally disobeying the Holy Spirit. This makes (as you might imagine) the religious leaders even angrier.  So they stone him. And Stephen sees the heavens open up, and he sees the angels and the Son of man, and he says to those who are stoning him, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing". Who does this sound like to you? At the very end of this chapter, you might have noticed a brief appearance by someone who will end up playing a major part in both the book of Acts and in the growing church (we will read many letters by him).  A young Pharisee named Saul is zealous for his faith, holding the coats of those who are stoning Stephen. And he has other plans for the follows of Jesus.... But, we move on for a moment, to hear about some exploit...

The apostles are witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus -- in both their deeds of power and in their preaching.  But they also spend time defending themselves from religious leaders who do not understand this new thing and who are angry and probably afraid.  They are brought up against the council more than once in these beginning chapters of Acts, and they are thrown into prison, only to be let out by the power of the Holy Spirit. "You know those uneducated fishermen you threw in prison?  they're preaching in the temple again!" For a little while, at least, the faith community seems to lead an ideal life.  They are devoted to Jesus and to one another.  They have no secrets (it seems) and they share everything -- not because they have to, but freely.  they sell property and lay the proceeds at the apostles' feet, to be used for the good of the whole community.  Wow. Until Ananais and Sapphire.  It doesn't take long for someone to come along ...