We are at chapter two verse 17. Paul, Silas, and Timothy, had to leave the Thessalonians. They wanted to go back very badly but Satan stopped them. Hmm. How do they know it was Satan and not humans? They are truly sad about that because the Thessalonians are the glorious crown they will wear in the presence of Jesus, when he comes. They make Paul and company look good. Too bad Jesus never came.
Paul got impatient (What, he didn't trust god's timing?) and sent Timothy back to Thessaloniki without him. Timothy was to bolster their faith, so they wouldn't be unsettled by the persecution they were going through. It was inevitable that they would be treated that way, as they had been told the first time Paul visited them. We are not told exactly what these persecutions entailed, physical, economic, or social harm, or a combination. Paul knew beforehand that it would happen, probably because he had seen the same results of his teaching elsewhere. He was worried that the Thessalonians would lose faith in what he taught them. Then his efforts would have been in vain. Their trials were blamed on "the tempter" tempting them.
Timothy returned back to Paul with a good report. The Thessalonians still like Paul and would like to see him again. Whew! They haven't given up their faith. Praise the lord! Paul and company are going to keep earnestly praying for the Thessalonians. One day they will get back and "supply what is lacking" in the Thessalonians' faith. What does that mean? What are they lacking? Paul is hoping god clears the way for another visit. In the meantime, he wants god to make their love increase and strengthen their hearts, so they will be ready when Jesus comes. Too bad he never came.
We are now at chapter four. Paul says he instructed the Thessalonians on how to live to please god, and they are doing it. But they've got to do it more. After all their instructions came by the authority of the lord Jesus. That's how we can know that their instructions were crap. Paul, Silas, and Timothy, never met Jesus, except in visions. Their authority is purely on their say so. The Thessalonians fell for it, hook line, and sinker. They get to tell the Thessalonians what god's will is and how are the Thessalonians to disagree? They never had any personal revelation of Jesus.
What did Paul say was god's will? Avoiding sexual immorality, controlling their bodies and not indulging in passionate lust "like the heathen who do not know god." The Thessalonian should not wrong his brother or take advantage of his brother, regarding this matter. Is Paul talking of same sex relations? It's hard to tell. It's obviously about some kind of sexual purity standards. Those who don't follow the standards have been warned that the lord will punish them.
Paul says he doesn't need to preach to the Thessalonians about brotherly love, because god seems to have already taught them how to love all the brothers throughout Macedonia. The brothers are clearly other christ believers. If god could teach them brotherly love without Paul's help, couldn't he have taught them other things as well. Why does god need Paul to spread his message?
Next, Paul tells the Thessalonians to "lead a quiet life, mind your own business, and work with your hands." That way they will earn the respect of outsiders and not be dependant on anyone. Wait. They are not to preach the gospel to their neighbors? It just occurred to me, most of the New Testament letters don't even encourage the readers to spread the gospel. The readers are just passive and obedient recipients of the message, a message that needs reinforcing and policing by Paul and his cohorts.
Till next time.
Showing posts with label Silas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Silas. Show all posts
Thursday, July 25, 2019
Wednesday, July 24, 2019
1 Thessalonians part two
We are at chapter two verse one. Paul, Silas, and Timothy had previously visited Thessaloniki. They thought their visit was a success, not like in Philippi, where they experienced non specific suffering and had been insulted. With god's help they dared to share the gospel with the Thessalonians, in spite of strong opposition. They weren't trying to trick the Thessalonians and their motives were pure, according to them. They spoke "as men approved by god," according to them. And everyone had to take their word for it. They claim to be trying to please god not men, but how in the world could anyone know for sure if they were telling the truth? Plus, why did god need them to spread the message? Why didn't he just tell the people himself? Why does god rely on an imperfect delivery system to get his word out? Think of all the people in the world who never heard the gospel. Are they all doomed? If they are not, then why does the message need spreading?
The author goes on to say they didn't use flattery, cover up greed, or look for praise. God is their witness. Some witness, he's mute. The three of them worked hard for their own support and did not expect anything from the Thessalonians. They shared what they had, as well as preached the gospel. The sharing part is commendable. The Thessalonians (and the mute god) were witnesses of how holy, righteous and blameless the three were among the believers. Are they supposed to be tooting their own horn? Also, we don't have the Thessalonians' side of the story. Plus, how did they treat nonbelievers?
The three treated the Thessalonians like a father treats his own children. Since they were actually adults, I wonder how they felt about that. They urged the Thessalonians to live lives worthy of god, whose spokesmen they were. What proof did the Thessalonians have besides their say so? The three were so pleased when their message was received as the word of god and not the word of men. Of course they were. The believers in Thessaloniki then became imitators of the christ believing churches in Judea. Then the believers in Thessaloniki began to experience the same persecution from their own countrymen that the believers in Judea received from the Jews. How bad was this persecution? Did they hurt them, or just ridicule them? We are not told.
Those Jews who treated believers in Judea badly are said to be the people who "killed the lord Jesus and the prophets" and also drove the three of them out. This is confusing to me, because weren't those believers also Jews? And what do the prophets have to do with it? Weren't the prophets also Jews? Also, this unfortunate passage has been used to support antisemitism throughout the ages, and it's not done being ugly. The author says these same Jews "displease god and are hostile to all men." They deliberately try to keep Paul, Timothy and Silas from speaking to the gentiles so they can be saved. In other words, those Jews don't want salvation for the non Jews. "In this way they heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of god has come upon them at last." Wow. So kind, loving, and christ like of Paul.
The Thessalonians had to take the author's word for all this, without proof. What Judean Jews were going to travel across the Mediterranean to Greece to set the record straight? They could basically spin any story they wanted, who would be the wiser?
Till next time.
The author goes on to say they didn't use flattery, cover up greed, or look for praise. God is their witness. Some witness, he's mute. The three of them worked hard for their own support and did not expect anything from the Thessalonians. They shared what they had, as well as preached the gospel. The sharing part is commendable. The Thessalonians (and the mute god) were witnesses of how holy, righteous and blameless the three were among the believers. Are they supposed to be tooting their own horn? Also, we don't have the Thessalonians' side of the story. Plus, how did they treat nonbelievers?
The three treated the Thessalonians like a father treats his own children. Since they were actually adults, I wonder how they felt about that. They urged the Thessalonians to live lives worthy of god, whose spokesmen they were. What proof did the Thessalonians have besides their say so? The three were so pleased when their message was received as the word of god and not the word of men. Of course they were. The believers in Thessaloniki then became imitators of the christ believing churches in Judea. Then the believers in Thessaloniki began to experience the same persecution from their own countrymen that the believers in Judea received from the Jews. How bad was this persecution? Did they hurt them, or just ridicule them? We are not told.
Those Jews who treated believers in Judea badly are said to be the people who "killed the lord Jesus and the prophets" and also drove the three of them out. This is confusing to me, because weren't those believers also Jews? And what do the prophets have to do with it? Weren't the prophets also Jews? Also, this unfortunate passage has been used to support antisemitism throughout the ages, and it's not done being ugly. The author says these same Jews "displease god and are hostile to all men." They deliberately try to keep Paul, Timothy and Silas from speaking to the gentiles so they can be saved. In other words, those Jews don't want salvation for the non Jews. "In this way they heap up their sins to the limit. The wrath of god has come upon them at last." Wow. So kind, loving, and christ like of Paul.
The Thessalonians had to take the author's word for all this, without proof. What Judean Jews were going to travel across the Mediterranean to Greece to set the record straight? They could basically spin any story they wanted, who would be the wiser?
Till next time.
Saturday, June 15, 2019
1 Peter part eight
We are now at chapter five, the last chapter. The first section directly addresses the elders among the readers. The word for elder here is Presbyterous, which denotes a mature or older man. The author says he is also an elder and a witness of Christ's sufferings. Is that a literal witness or a metaphorical one?
The elders are told to be shepherds and overseers of god's flock under their care, not because they must, but because they are willing, as god wants them to be. In other words, they must. They are not to be greedy for money or lord it over those entrusted to them, but be examples to the flock. Boy, some older men in the church today have missed this verse. Those who do this will receive a crown of glory that will never fade away, after they are dead. Again, what the heck is glory? And who wants an eternal crown as a prize? What Is it good for?
Next, the author addresses young men. They are to be submissive to the older men. All of them are to "clothe themselves with humility toward one another." They do this because of Proverbs 3:34 which, according to the author, says "God opposes the proud and gives grace to the humble." However, my old testament says, "He mocks proud mockers but gives grace to the humble." The new Testament version leaves out the connection between pride and mockery, probably because he would prefer to relate it to disobedience. Of course he also relates it all back to submission to god. They are also to cast all their anxiety on god "because he cares for them." And what good does that do?
The readers are also told to "be self controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour." And what proof is there of this? None. It is meant to provoke fear in the hearts of the readers. They are told to resist the devil by standing firm in the faith, of course. Why? Because their brothers throughout the world are also suffering. This is like telling a child to eat all his food because children are starving in Africa. But it's okay, because after they suffer for a little while (their whole life) Christ will restore himself to them and make them firm and steadfast. Big whoop.
The letter ends with the author saying he had Silas's help writing this letter. How do we know if Silas wrote what he was supposed to? The author trusted him, but why should we? Silas is associated with Paul in much of the book of Acts. The author may have included the name as a nod to that, as an attempt at proof of authenticity.
There is also a reference to "she who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, which in general Christianese is thought to mean the church in Rome, where Peter was possibly writing from. They and "My son Mark" greet the readers with a kiss of love. Christian tradition associates Mark, the supposed author of the book of Mark with Peter, and it is believed this is the same Mark. All this is without any evidence.
The elders are told to be shepherds and overseers of god's flock under their care, not because they must, but because they are willing, as god wants them to be. In other words, they must. They are not to be greedy for money or lord it over those entrusted to them, but be examples to the flock. Boy, some older men in the church today have missed this verse. Those who do this will receive a crown of glory that will never fade away, after they are dead. Again, what the heck is glory? And who wants an eternal crown as a prize? What Is it good for?
Next, the author addresses young men. They are to be submissive to the older men. All of them are to "clothe themselves with humility toward one another." They do this because of Proverbs 3:34 which, according to the author, says "God opposes the proud and gives grace to the humble." However, my old testament says, "He mocks proud mockers but gives grace to the humble." The new Testament version leaves out the connection between pride and mockery, probably because he would prefer to relate it to disobedience. Of course he also relates it all back to submission to god. They are also to cast all their anxiety on god "because he cares for them." And what good does that do?
The readers are also told to "be self controlled and alert. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour." And what proof is there of this? None. It is meant to provoke fear in the hearts of the readers. They are told to resist the devil by standing firm in the faith, of course. Why? Because their brothers throughout the world are also suffering. This is like telling a child to eat all his food because children are starving in Africa. But it's okay, because after they suffer for a little while (their whole life) Christ will restore himself to them and make them firm and steadfast. Big whoop.
The letter ends with the author saying he had Silas's help writing this letter. How do we know if Silas wrote what he was supposed to? The author trusted him, but why should we? Silas is associated with Paul in much of the book of Acts. The author may have included the name as a nod to that, as an attempt at proof of authenticity.
There is also a reference to "she who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, which in general Christianese is thought to mean the church in Rome, where Peter was possibly writing from. They and "My son Mark" greet the readers with a kiss of love. Christian tradition associates Mark, the supposed author of the book of Mark with Peter, and it is believed this is the same Mark. All this is without any evidence.
Friday, May 25, 2018
Philppians, part one
As we begin the letter to the Philippians, we see that the letter is not just from Paul, but from Timothy also. The letter goes on to thank god for the Philippians. They are told that they are prayed for with joy because of their good work. Paul longs affectionately for all of them. He prays that they will continue to have an abundance of love, discernment, purity, and righteousness.
In verse twelve, Paul talks about his incarceration. He is in chains, under the oversight of the palace guard. At the end of the letter (4:22) we see this is Caesar's palace, which would be in Rome. The palace guard knows that the reason for his imprisonment is his religious proselytizing. His chains have actually encouraged other believers to speak "the word of god"more courageously.
Verses 15-18, Paul speaks of two groups of people who preach Christ: 1. Those who do it out of envy, rivalry, and selfish ambition, just to stir up trouble for Paul. (This makes absolutely no sense to me) 2. Those who do it out of good will and love. Then Paul goes on to say it doesn't matter. Either way, the gospel gets preached. If it doesn't matter, why mention it? Who are these people who preach the right thing for the wrong reasons? If they are preaching the same gospel as Paul, wouldn't they end up in chains also?
So, no matter what, Paul will rejoice. He knows that the prayers of the Philippians and help from the spirit of Jesus Christ will cause him to be released. (Magical thinking) Paul also hopes that he will have enough courage to not do anything he will be ashamed of later. He wants Christ to always be exalted in his body, even if that means becoming a martyr. "For me, to live is Christ, to die is gain."
This is what Christians all over the world claim to believe, but their actions say otherwise. Most of them don't really want to die. They make every effort to stay alive as long as possible.
Paul, on the other hand, says he is torn between living or dying. He wants so bad to die and be with Christ, because that is the best possible outcome. However, it would be better for the Philippians if he stayed alive. That's why he knows he won't die yet. Then, he will get to continue on with them and their joy in Christ will overflow because of him. Conceited or what?
At the end of chapter one, Paul tells the Philippians that whatever happens, they need to behave themselves. That way Paul will know they are standing firm in the gospel and are not afraid of those who oppose them. The Philippians' lack of fear will prove to those unnamed others that they will be destroyed, but the Philippians will be saved by god. I bet those other people were quaking in their boots. (Not) Paul says the Philippians were not only given the privilege to believe in christ, but also to suffer for him. Proof of this is they are going through some unnamed struggle that is just like Paul's struggle was/is, whatever that was/is.
My study bible refers us to Acts 16:11-38, to read about Paul's time in Philippi. There Paul and Silas were put in jail after exorcising a "spirit" from a little girl. They were miraculously released from their jell cell by an earthquake, but did not leave. After preaching to the jailor, he and his household were baptized. The magistrates let Paul and Silas go after they were found to be Roman citizens. Another important convert in Philippi was a woman named Lydia. This letter to the Philippians does not mention Lydia, Silas, the jailor, or the events depicted in Acts.
In verse twelve, Paul talks about his incarceration. He is in chains, under the oversight of the palace guard. At the end of the letter (4:22) we see this is Caesar's palace, which would be in Rome. The palace guard knows that the reason for his imprisonment is his religious proselytizing. His chains have actually encouraged other believers to speak "the word of god"more courageously.
Verses 15-18, Paul speaks of two groups of people who preach Christ: 1. Those who do it out of envy, rivalry, and selfish ambition, just to stir up trouble for Paul. (This makes absolutely no sense to me) 2. Those who do it out of good will and love. Then Paul goes on to say it doesn't matter. Either way, the gospel gets preached. If it doesn't matter, why mention it? Who are these people who preach the right thing for the wrong reasons? If they are preaching the same gospel as Paul, wouldn't they end up in chains also?
So, no matter what, Paul will rejoice. He knows that the prayers of the Philippians and help from the spirit of Jesus Christ will cause him to be released. (Magical thinking) Paul also hopes that he will have enough courage to not do anything he will be ashamed of later. He wants Christ to always be exalted in his body, even if that means becoming a martyr. "For me, to live is Christ, to die is gain."
This is what Christians all over the world claim to believe, but their actions say otherwise. Most of them don't really want to die. They make every effort to stay alive as long as possible.
Paul, on the other hand, says he is torn between living or dying. He wants so bad to die and be with Christ, because that is the best possible outcome. However, it would be better for the Philippians if he stayed alive. That's why he knows he won't die yet. Then, he will get to continue on with them and their joy in Christ will overflow because of him. Conceited or what?
At the end of chapter one, Paul tells the Philippians that whatever happens, they need to behave themselves. That way Paul will know they are standing firm in the gospel and are not afraid of those who oppose them. The Philippians' lack of fear will prove to those unnamed others that they will be destroyed, but the Philippians will be saved by god. I bet those other people were quaking in their boots. (Not) Paul says the Philippians were not only given the privilege to believe in christ, but also to suffer for him. Proof of this is they are going through some unnamed struggle that is just like Paul's struggle was/is, whatever that was/is.
My study bible refers us to Acts 16:11-38, to read about Paul's time in Philippi. There Paul and Silas were put in jail after exorcising a "spirit" from a little girl. They were miraculously released from their jell cell by an earthquake, but did not leave. After preaching to the jailor, he and his household were baptized. The magistrates let Paul and Silas go after they were found to be Roman citizens. Another important convert in Philippi was a woman named Lydia. This letter to the Philippians does not mention Lydia, Silas, the jailor, or the events depicted in Acts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)