Ignatius's letter to the Ephesians part two.

After reading the Wikipedia article on Ignatius and reading some of his letter to the Ephesians, I have a lot of questions about how anyone could know if he was real or fiction. As far as I know there are no originals of Ignatius's letters. He would have been writing on or about the first century mark, if his letters are genuine. Why was he imprisoned? We are not told. Yet it can't have been just for being a a Christian or preaching christianity, because others were doing that freely. He was even supposedly permitted to fraternize with christians while he was in chains. Why was he being taken to Rome? The authorities could have dealt with him right where he lived. Why did he expect to be martyred? That early on, martyrdom didn't necessarily mean death.

We are now at the 8th chapter of Ignatius's letter. Let's see what else he has to say. Ignatius appears to be buttering up the Ephesians , telling them they are living according to god's will, being faithful, spiritual, and doing all things in Jesus. They don't listen to false teachers, no siree. They are the cream of the crop, the tippety top, when it comes to loving god and obeying the commandments of Jesus. We aren't told what those commandments are.

The Ephesians are to pray for the poor deluded souls who are not followers of the lord. They are to be meek and humble in the face of insults, boasting, and cruelties. After all, no people are more unjustly treated than the followers of the lord. The Ephesians are to stay holy and not let the devil plant any false ideas in their minds.

Next, the author says they are in the "last times." Sound familiar? It's been the last times for a long time. In spite of the fact that Ignatius thinks the Ephesians are already the greatest, he feels it is necessary to tell them how to live, as if they didn't know. They must do one of two things: "Either stand in awe of of the wrath to come or or show regard for the grace which is at present displayed." When the end comes, he wants to be on the same team as the Ephesians.

Ignatius is a condemned man, but the Ephesians live in safety and appear to be a refuge for refugees of the gospel. They were mentioned by Paul "in all his epistles." (That isn't actually true.) They were initiated into the mysteries of the gospel with "Paul, the holy, the martyred, the deservedly most happy." Ignatius wants to find himself at the feet of Paul when he dies. At the writing of this letter, Paul should not have been dead more than about 50 years, yet he is being venerated as something of a saint.

The Ephesians are to meet regularly in the same place. That destroys the power of Satan. (Wouldn't they have already been doing that?) None of the things in this letter are hid from them if they perfectly possess faith and love. (If these things are not hidden and the Ephesians are as wonderful as Ignatius says, why does he need to tell them all this stuff. Isn't he preaching to the choir?) A person who makes a declaration of faith does not sin. A person who loves does not hate. How the Ephesians behave matters, not just "mere profession." They must be faithful to the end. I hope they had good lives, in spite of never getting to see the end they were hoping for.

More next time.

2 Thessalonians part four

We are now at chapter three. The author asks for the Thessalonians' prayers that "the message of the lord be spread quickly and honored," just as it was with them. They were also to pray that Paul and his cohorts be "delivered from wicked and evil men, for not everyone has faith." The clear implication is that those without faith are wicked and evil. The author has confidence that the Thessalonians are doing and will continue to do the things he commanded. Woah. The things he commanded, not the things god or Jesus commanded?

Wondering what was commanded? Here is an example: "Keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us." When Paul was there, he worked day and night, and he paid for any food he ate. This was his way of setting a good example for the Thessalonians to follow. His rule was, "If a man will not work, he shall not eat." It's not a horrible rule, unless someone is unable to work or the work load is not divided fairly.

The author claims to have heard that some of the Thessalonians are not busy, just busybodies. They are told to "settle down and earn the bread they eat." Anyone who doesn't follow these instructions is to be shamed by shunning, without being regarded as an enemy. It's done with brotherly love. Shunning is despicable. But I don't know how you would deal with someone who was deliberately sponging off others. I certainly don't think it is right to starve anyone, even those who refuse to work. I'll have to think about it some more.

The letter ends with a wish for peace for the Thessalonians. Then it says "I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand, which is the distinguishing mark in all my letters. This is how I write." That's kind of an odd thing to say in a second letter to people who presumably already know what his written greetings look like. If this author is not Paul, he may be trying to establish his credentials with this statement.

Well that's it for this short letter. Next time is the wrap up.

Hebrews part sixteen

We are currently at Hebrews 11:32. The author does some name dropping here. He says Gideon, Barak, Samson, Jepthah, David, Samuel, and the prophets, all did amazing things because of faith. We are told about some of those recorded events. Go back to the old testament and read about each of those people. They also did some horrendous things, according to the stories. In fact a couple of them were pretty horrible people. The author also clearly alludes to Daniel but does not mention his name. But none of that matters, does it, because there is no reason to believe any of it actually happened. Yet again, if any of it did happen, it clearly was not because of faith in Jesus and a far distant resurrection.

Verses 35-38 describe tortures, persecutions, mistreatments,  and trials, endured for the gain of a better resurrection. Better than what? "These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised." What exactly was promised anyway? According to the author, "God planned something better for us (the Hebrews) so that only together with us would they be made perfect." Great. It took hundreds of years and immeasurable death, pain, and suffering, but God's had a plan that's coming together perfectly right now, as in 2,000 years ago. Maybe.

We are now in chapter twelve. I managed to escape faith in god. What about you? The author continues on by claiming all the aforementioned characters as witnesses to god's plan. That should be enough, he says, to make the readers throw off whatever is holding them back and run the race with perseverance. The goal: Jesus, "the author and perfecter of our faith." He was so looking forward to the pleasure of perfecting their faith that he endured the shame and pain of the cross. What's six hours  in trade for an eternity at the right hand of god? When the reader gets tired and loses heart, he can think about Jesus, who also endured opposition from sinful men. So waht if their pain lasts years instead of hours.

Now the Hebrews writer gets deadly serious. The readers haven't yet laid their blood on the line for Jesus. What's up with that? They've also forgotten Proverbs 3:11-12, which  addresses them as sons (them as in the readers, or the Hebrews of all time?). It says, " My son, do not make light of the lord's discipline and do not lose heart when he rebukes you, because the lord disciplines those he loves." Oh, but the author of Hebrews does not stop there. He adds one more bit that isn't in the Psalm, as though it is actually part of it. "And he punishes everyone he accepts as a son." My study bible states that the word punish here means "to whip." This is corporal punishment, from god, and is evidence that the Hebrew writer made stuff up to influence his readers into believing that hardships endured were a direct proof of god's love for them. He is prepping them for martyrdom.

The author continues on in this vein, declaring that god is treating them as his sons by disciplining them, because aren't all sons disciplined. Obviously the Hebrew writer must have been, because, according to him, discipline makes you a true son, not an illegitimate one. (We all know illegitimate children never get disciplined). What?! The author says we respect our human fathers for disciplining us. Maybe he did, but it is clear that is not universal. Nevertheless, to the author, that is proof we should obey "the father of our spirits" even more "and live!" (The implication being that we won't get eternal life if we don't.) Supposedly, just like our fathers, god disciplines us because he thinks it is for our own good. (I think a father's harsh discipline is usually for the father's own good.) We think discipline is painful when it is happening, but the author wants us to see the long term benefits. "It produces a harvest of righteousness and peace." For whom?

Verse twelve calls the readers weaklings with feeble arms and weak knees who need to walk on straight paths so they will be healed. This makes no sense in the surrounding context. However it appears to partly be a reference to Isaiah 35:3, which is part of an admonition to "be strong, do not fear; your god will come...with vengeance, with divine retribution...to save you." Now that makes more sense. Why didn't the author quote the whole passage? Maybe he didn't want to give them false hope. Instead he combined a small bit of it with another small bit from Proverbs 4:26 and made nonsense.    Till next time.

Till next time

Hebrews part fifteen

We are now at Hebrews 11:17. It's time to read more about Abraham's faith. Abraham's faith was so great that he offered his son Isaac as a sacrifice when god tested him. God was being a sadistic bastard. He had previously  told Abraham that the promise of numerous offspring would be fulfilled through Isaac. The Hebrews author claims Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac because he "reasoned" that god could raise the dead. Baloney. The author of Hebrews is trying to use the old testament story to prove that belief in resurrection has always been part of Hebrew beliefs. There is actually no indication in most of the old testament that anyone of the ancient Abrahamic tradition believed in a resurrection of the dead. Sheol was the fate of every dead person. The author of Hebrews goes on to say that "figuratively speaking, he (Abraham) did receive Isaac back from the dead." Just so you know, figurative speech doesn't have any more substance than faith.

Next, the author says, that by faith Isaac blessed Jacob's and Esau's future. In other words, he said magical words at them that were supposed to have some mystical power over their lives. By faith, Jacob also "blessed" Joseph's sons. By faith, Joseph spoke of the exodus from egypt and what he wanted done with his bones. Joseph did speak of the Israelites leaving Egypt, going to the promised land, and taking his bones with them, in Genesis 50,  but there were no other specifics. We are not going to go into the fact that none of the stuff we are reading about actually happened. So, it doesn't matter what these supposed patriarchs supposedly said or did and why they did it. It's the same as if we would take the Iliad and the Odyssey seriously.

The author goes on to say, "by faith Moses's parents hid him for three months after he was born because they saw that he was no ordinary child, and they were afraid of the king's edict." Any parent worth being called a parent would try to do anything they could to save their child from death. Faith has nothing to do with it.

 We are also told that "by faith, Moses refused to be called the son of Pharoah's daughter. He chose to be mistreated along with the people of god rather than enjoy the pleasures of sin for a short time." Again, this never actually happened, but let's look at what Exodus says. Did Moses refuse to be called the son of Pharoah's daughter? Nope, can't find that. Did Moses choose to be mistreated along with the people of god? Nope, can't find that either. In fact, Exodus 2:11 says Moses went out and watched his people doing hard labor.

In Hebrews 11:26, the author says, Moses "regarded disgrace for the sake of christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt because he was looking ahead to his reward." This is blatant nonsense. Go back and read Exodus 2. Moses killed a man and became a fugitive, eventually going incognito as a shepherd. He had no eternal reward in mind only saving his own skin. Moses had no christ in mind.

Next, the author says, "By faith (Moses) left Egypt, not fearing the king's anger, because he saw him who is invisible." At least that part is true to the Exodus story. The reader is also told,"By faith (Moses) kept the passover and the sprinkling of the blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel." That also happened in the story. Plus, Moses never pleaded on behalf of all the innocent children that would die that night. Nice guy.

Some more things that supposedly happened by faith: the people walked through the Red Sea on dry land, the walls of Jericho fell, Rahab welcomed spies and was not killed. These are all stories that most likely never happened, so faith had nothing to do with them. Besides, if faith was a factor, it wasn't faith in Jesus or a resurrection, was it?

Till next time.

Hebrews part fourteen

We are now at Hebrews chapter eleven, verse 4. Will the famous faith chapter convince us to have faith in Jesus our heavenly high priest? We shall see. The reader is now going to be told about various old testament characters who had faith. First up is Abel. According to the author, faith made Able give a better sacrifice than Cain did. What was different about Abel's sacrifice? It was a Blood sacrifice. The Hebrews author has already told us blood needs to be shed for god to keep his promises. Cain didn't get the blood sacrifice thing so he offered grain. God liked Abel's sacrifice better. As we all know, Cain killed Abel. Now Abel is dead. (Genesis 4)However, according to Hebrews, Abel still speaks by faith. I can't hear him. Can you?

The next faithful person mentioned is Enoch. Enoch didn't die. The old testament tells us god took him away. (Genesis 5) Enoch pleased god because he had faith. "Without faith it is impossible to please god....Anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him." You gotta believe, or you get nutthin'. And sometimes you get nothing even when you believe.

Next up: Noah. He built the ark by faith when he was warned about the future flood. By faith he saved his family and condemned the rest of the world. That way he became one of the heirs of righteousness. Great job Noah! It's so righteous to watch everyone die while you float away to safety.

Abraham is fourth on the faithful list. Abraham went to a far away land because a voice in his head told him that the land would eventually be his. He believed it. Abraham lived in the foreign land. So did his son Isaac and grandson Jacob. They were also supposed to be  heirs of the promise that had been given to Abraham. I don't remember if they  heard the voice in their heads too. Abraham's faith made him believe the voice in his head when it told him he would have descendants that were as numerous as stars or grains of sand. Even though his wife was barren and Abraham was no spring chicken, his faith in the voice enabled him to become a father. Is that how babies are made, through faith?

Each of the faithful people mentioned are said to have remained faithful till they died. (Let that be a lesson to you.) They never actually got what the voice in their heads promised them. They just "saw and welcomed them from a distance. And they admitted they were aliens and strangers on earth." Except, the Old testament never says that those faithful people  saw and welcomed a promise from a distance. And the only time any of them said they were aliens and strangers was in Genesis 23:4, when Abraham told the Hittites that he was a stranger among them.

Even though those people never said those things, the Hebrews author says that people who do say those things are "looking for a country of their own." (Or one that they can take away from someone else?) Otherwise, they would have taken the opportunity to return to the country they had left. He must be talking just  about Abraham, because this doesn't apply to all the others. The author goes on to say "They (Who's they?) were looking for a better country-- a heavenly one." Of course they were. That's why they never actually mentioned it. Must have slipped their minds.Nevertheless, that''s why god has prepared a (heavenly) city for them. Lucky dogs.

Till next time.

Hebrews part thirteen

We are now at Hebrews 10:32. The author is reminding the readers of earlier days when they had "received the light" and stood their ground "in a great contest in the face of suffering." They were publicly insulted and persecuted, and supported others who were similarly treated. They sympathized with those in prison and "joyfully accepted the confiscation of their property." (What do you want to bet they weren't as joyful as the author makes out.) They did all this because they had "better and lasting possessions." You know, those perfect heavenly things of which earthly things are only a shadow: shadow furniture, shadow clothes, shadow food.

The readers need to remember their perseverance in doing the will of god will be richly rewarded, after they are dead, or maybe even sooner. After all, Habbakuk 2:3-4 says, "He who is coming will come and not delay. But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him."

As usual there is a problem with the author quoting the passage from Habakkuk. It's not a person, but a thing, that will come without delay, specifically a revelation about "the end." Also, the author left out a couple of words and phrases that don't fit his narrative. He also completely makes up that bit at the end about not pleasing god if you shrink back. It's not in Habbakuk. That doesn't stop him from making it important though. He goes on to say, "We are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed but of those who believe and are saved." He's got that kind of backward, hasn't he? The believers often ended up being destroyed. Those who recanted were saved. At least in this shadow world.

We are now in chapter eleven, the most famous chapter of this book. It is all about faith. The author has been leading us to this point so that he can make the case for faith. He believes that if you haven't got faith, you haven't got anything. He defines faith as: "Being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." That's the NIV version. You may be more familiar with the KJV, "Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." The NIV version sounds almost like a definition of extreme optimism. The KJV version sounds delusional. What do tangible thing do you actually have when you have faith? No-thing! There is no substance to faith, so it can't be actual evidence of the invisible.

This author is playing fast and loose with reality. He's making bald assertions that make no sense. He's basically saying that having faith in something is what makes it true. People have faith in all kinds of things. Is all faith in unseen things equal evidence for those things' existence? The author continues to play on the theme of faith and the unseen by telling the reader that it is by faith that they "understand the universe was made at god's command (nothing but faith), so that what us seen was not made out of what was visible." Don't tell me...God made something out of nothing! How clever of him to do just what christians claim can't be done. God himself doesn't have substance.  So, if we don't have faith in this assertion, how was the universe made? Good question. We've got top minds working on it. In the meantime, you can get the general idea from here. You might also try reading A Universe From Nothing? by Sean Carrol.

Till next time.

Ephesians chapter 1, part 4, and chapter 2

*As we have seen, Paul should have been very familiar with the church in Ephesus and in Asia Minor. He was there for at least two years, according to Acts. Yet, verse fifteen of Ephesians chapter one sounds as though Paul's knowledge of the recipients of this letter is from hearsay. We will be on the lookout for any internal evidence that this letter was written to people with whom Paul had previous associations.

*The rest of the chapter is exhortations, Paul's "prayers" for the recipients of the letter, and a bit of christological mumbo jumbo. Stuff about God's power displayed in raising christ from the dead, putting him in dominion over all other authorities and titles, not only in the present, but the future as well. Paul covers all the bases, preemptively discounting any other messiahs or spiritual and earthly authority figures that may arise. Jesus is it. He's the big boss and the church is his henchman, um body.

*Moving on to chapter 2. Now Paul says that the readers were once dead in their sins and transgressions, because they followed the ways of the world and the ruler of the kingdom of the air. Say what? What is the kingdom of the air? This phrase is not found anywhere else in the Bible, but you can believe there is plenty of speculation by people who act like they know what they are talking about. This being is also called the spirit who is at work in those who are disobedient. (Disobedient to whom?) Therefore, the claim made by commentators is this must be referring to Satan. A quick scan of the rest of Ephesians shows that Paul does refer to the devil in chapter six, but Satan is not named.

*Paul goes on to say that "we" were by nature objects of wrath. Speak for yourself dear Paul. God, being so wonderful, and rich in mercy and love, has saved us. God raised the readers up and seated them with christ in the heavenly realms. This is obviously metaphorical. I haven't seen any christians rise up to heavenly realms, yet. This is so that in the coming age (which hasn't come yet) "God can show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in christ jesus." what does this mean in practical earthly terms? Not much. It basically boils down to some people believing a dead dude was resurrected by a god, so that one nebulous day in the nebulous future, that invisible god won't get angry at them for being the sorry creatures they were born to be. Then they will someday get to sit with the dead dude in the sky. What fun.

*How do the readers get this priveledge? Not because they deserve it or earned it by doing anything, but because god gave it to them. It was a present called "grace." Don't know what grace is? That's okay, neither does anyone else, even though they like to think they do. Sometimes it is defined as unmerited favor, but that is not very concrete either. This wonderful gift has a catch-- faith. You gotta believe that god and jesus actually exist or you are out of luck. Oh yeah, even though you can't earn this gift by doing anything, you totally got stuff to do. God has some chores he needs done and he prepared them just for those who have faith. Aren't they blessed?

Edited

Galatians chapter 3 part 1

After a few detours, we are back in Galatians at chapter 3:

*Here Paul is berating the Galatians. He says they recieved the "spirit" by believing about the crucifiction of Jesus as it was portrayed when they heard it, probably from Paul, who never encountered the living Jesus, except through visions. They recieved the spirit and witnessed miracles not because they observed the law, but because they believed. Here, and in most of christianity, belief is the supreme virtue, even above any moral acts.

*Abraham is given as the epitome of righteousness obtained through belief, and anyone who believes is a metaphorical child of Abraham. Paul says everyone who relies on observing the law is under a curse because it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." (Deut 26:27, Jer. 11:3) Well, Paul, technically that means you and your gentile friends are cursed. To counter that, Paul also quotes Habbakuk 2:4 which  according to Paul says "the righteous will live by faith." Looking back at that verse in Habbakuk, I find a footnote that says this passage could also say "the righteous will live by Faithfulness." Faith and Faithfulness are two different things. The first cognitive the second active, comparable to the difference between belief and ongoing obedience. One word that could send Paul's argument down the drain. Abraham didn't have to worry about the curse under the law because it didn't exist yet.

*Next Paul says Christ redeemed us from the law by becoming a curse for us. For it is written, "cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." (Deut. 21:23) Well it seems to me that being crucified is not the same as being hung. I guess it doesn't matter because it's still on a piece of wood. What about all the other innocent people who were hung or crucified, were they cursed for our sake? How does that work? We are cursed by not following the law properly,  then we are not cursed because Jesus was cursed for us, then we are cursed for trying to follow the law anyway? I think Paul is trying to say that Jesus's crucifixion nullified the law and its curse, essentially rolling back  to before there was a law, when Faith was the supreme virtue. But then he wants to claim that curse still holds if you don't believe in Jesus crucified.

*Abraham, if he existed, didn't believe in Jesus, he believed in El/Yahweh. Can a person just believe in that and be free from the curse of the law? It seems that Paul says you have to actually believe there was a redeemer of the curse for the nullification of the curse to work. It's like your mind flicks an invisible curse switch. Otherwise, you're toast.

James 2 part 2

Before we continue, we need to acknowledge that the first followers of Jesus were clearly Jews and probably did not intend to leave Judaism and create a distinct religion. Nowhere in the stories of Jesus's life does he seem to expect them to do that.  The teachings ascribed to Jesus were actually not that different from those that history outside the New Testament  ascribes to the pharisees, even though the gospel accounts and modern christianity would have you believe otherwise. The Pharisees were not literalists and believed in a liberal interpretation of scripture using oral tradition. They believed in resurrection and an afterlife. They were populists not elitists. This man James strikes me as possibly being a Pharisee who lived after the destruction of Jerusalem.

*Moving on. The next section, beginning in verse 14 contrasts faith and deeds. Again James addresses "my brothers, " fellow Jews. James asks,"what good is it if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?" This is a question which has plagued christians since the reformation.  James says faith not accompanied by action is dead. How do you prove you have faith if you don't do anything to show it. Intellectual and verbal assent that there is one God means nothing, even the demons acknowledge that. The phrase "one God" (NIV) is a reference to the Shema, a Jewish mantra that says " the lord our God is one." In fact other english translations of verse James 2:19 say "God is one." This is problematic for trinitarians who say that God is three in one.

*Verses 20-24 give the example of Abraham as evidence that faith and deeds go together. Abraham showed true faith by offering his son Isaac on the altar (Genesis 15). That is what real faith does. It makes people willing to do crazy things that they otherwise would not have done. We see it happening in the world today. We also hear people say that they would kill their own children if God asked them to, as proof of the sincerity of their faith. A close relative of mine said this to me. True faith is scary stuff.

*James says this proves a person is justified by what he does, not by faith alone. Then he gives another example, Rahab the prostitute who helped the Hebrew spies in Jericho.(Joshua 2). She was considered righteous for what she did, in spite of her occupation. "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead." I'm guessing Rahab would have been dead if she hadn't helped the spies. Is an active faith the same thing as self preservation? What if I do all the deeds without faith, can I get by? Who will know? No one that's who. People think you are a wonderful christian if you do all the good stuff and keep your mouth shut about what you really believe. Ask me how I know.