Titus part six and Wrap up

Paul ends the letter with personal info. As soon as he sends Artemas and Tychicus to Titus, Titus is to go to Paul at Nicopolis, where he will be spending the winter. I guess Titus better hurry up with his appointing elders and teaching in every town in Crete. He is also to help Zenas the lawyer and Appollos leave Crete well supplied. Presumably, they will be given what they need by the Christians in Crete because the next sentence says "our people (christians) must learn to devote themselves to doing good that they may provide for daily necessities and not live unproductive lives." The author ends with greetings from those with him and greetings to "those who love us in the faith." To me this looks like a dig at those who do not agree with Paul's version of the faith. Either you are with him, or against him.

Now for the wrap up. The letter to Titus contains no people, places, or events from the Old Testament. The only references to Judaism are snide remarks about Jewish myths, the circumcision group, genealogies, and arguments about the law. There are no scripture references, but there is a reference to a Cretan's poem about the eternal nature of Zeus. It would almost seem that this was written by someone who had never been a Jew.

There are no references to Jesus's birth, life, teachings, miracles, trial, death, burial, and resurrection. There are no words or commands of Jesus mentioned. Jesus is called the savior but not the son of god. God is said to have brought salvation by the "washing of rebirth and renewal by the holy spirit" poured out through Jesus Christ. It doesn't say how this was accomplished.

There is no mention of demons, Satan, or hell. There is no mention of angels or miracles, and no direct mention of heaven, just eternal life. The author does not claim his words are inspired or are the "word of god."

The main body of the letter told Titus who could be appointed elders and what to teach the various genders and age groups about how to behave, so they wouldn't bring disgrace to the community of believers. These included instructions to slaves but not to masters. There were also instructions on how to handle those who opposed Paul's version of religion. This was basically to rebuke them, then have nothing to do with them if they wouldn't listen.

Up next: Ecclesiastes.

Jude, part 2

You can read the book of Jude here. There are no chapters. I will also be checking each verse against the interlinear Greek. You can do that on bible hub also.

The first section of the letter is labelled "The sin and doom of godless men" in my study bible. Sounds ominous. Jude says he is writing to these nonspecific people because he is worried that godless men who have secretly slipped in among them. In the NIV, these bad people were supposedly written about long ago, but Jude doesn't tell us where or when. The study bible does plenty of speculation, however. Also, if you look at other translations it is not translated as being "written beforehand." Instead it speaks of men who were designated (predestined?) for condemnation long ago. If Jude is written by a Jew to Jews, he might be referring to the Jewish sect known as "the way", later called christianity.

In verse 4, some insiders are accused of changing the grace of god (there's the word grace again) into a license for immorality. They also deny Jesus is the only sovereign and Lord. This sounds very similar to what many christians say about atheists today. "You don't believe in god because you just want to sin." In this case, it would seem that some people in the sect that we would call early christianity did not  believe Jesus had any kind of authority over them.

However, if you consider Jude might have been written by a Jew to Jews, not christians, all you have to do is take out the words "Jesus Christ" and verse 4 would still make sense, except it would be talking about god as the sovereign lord. The writer of Jude could very well be telling Jews that just because god has been gracious enough to make them a holy people, doesn't mean they don't have to obey him via the law of Moses.

Verse 5 says "Though you already know all this, (they would know it if they were Jews), I want to remind you that the lord at one time delivered his people (the Hebrews/ancestors of the Jews) out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe." The lord in this verse must be referring to yahweh/god. This would make the previous word lord in verse 4 confusing, if it was referring to Jesus. Are there two lords in this book or one? The ESV fixed the problem by replacing the word lord with Jesus. But even a child in Sunday school could tell you Jesus was not the one who delivered his people out of Egypt.

Verse 6 says, "And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling--these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great day." This is a unique teaching in the New Testament, found elsewhere only in 2 Peter, another highly disputed text. Scholars have noted similarities in Jude and 2 Peter, and suspect that the 2 Peter author used the Jude text as a reference. 2 Peter is an obviously Christian text. I have come to believe Jude is not. A very interesting tidbit is that this verse appears to draw from a Jewish writing called the book of Enoch. The book of Enoch was written at least 300 years BCE. Part of it tells the story of the supposed fallen angels. It is clear that Jude drew from the book in this verse, but my study bible does not mention that at all. That is an interesting ommission. The author of 2 Peter could also have concievably drawn from the Enoch text. There is no way to know. What is clear from reading the linked articles,  is that the concept of fallen angels was a Jewish cultural myth that made its way into mainstream Christianity. Fascinating stuff.

More to come.

Galatians wrap up

Whew! I am so glad that is over. Galatians was much more complicated than I had realised.  Let's summarize:

The Galatians were gentiles that Paul had taught Jesus worship at one time. Paul got news that they were being influenced by Jews teaching that circumcision was necessary to become children of yahweh. Paul declares, through metaphors, that those who follow the law of Moses aren't the true heirs of the promise, but those that have faith like Abraham are. He compares followers of the law to children born in slavery, turning the conventional understanding of Judaism upside down. Then he declares the Galatians free, by virtue of faith, from a law they were never bound to in the first place.

Paul also gives an account of his conversion that is somewhat different from that depicted in the book of Acts. He tells the Galatians that he learned everything about Jesus from personal revelations through visions, not from mere people, especially not those Jews in Jerusalem, who think they are so special. Throughout the whole book we feel an antipathy towards Judaism. Paul even goes so far as to say that Jews are not children of the promise and will not inherit anything if they don't have faith in the cross of Jesus. Plus, if the Jews are so obsessed with circumcision, Paul says they should go one step further and cut it all off.

Last, Paul explains how to tell the difference between people who live by the sinful nature and those who live by the spirit. Just in case those who live by the spirit slip up, the ones who are more spiritual are to help those backsliders see the true path. Along the way, they must keep a steady eye on themselves as well.

This book does not claim to be the word of a God or gods. It is very one sided. We do not know what the Galatians or the Jews thought of what Paul wrote or taught.

I think the book of  Jonah will be a nice change of pace.