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.

1 Peter part seven

We are now at 1 Peter 4:3 and have just read that suffering people are "done with sin" and now live for the will of god. We know that is not quite accurate, to say the least. The author says that the readers used to live in a "flood of dissipation, " just like the  pagans. (Do you think flood here is an oblique reference to the genesis flood?) Those pagans are now heaping abuse on the believers because they will no longer join in their carousing and orgies. Not to worry, they will get what is coming to them from the judge of the living and the dead. That's why Jesus went and preached the gospel (which hasn't been defined in this book) to the dead, because god is going to judge them.

Look out! The end is near! Keep a clear mind, so you can pray. "Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers a multitude of sins." Well then. If love covers sins, then why isn't that the be all and end all of Christianity. Why is baptism necessary? Why is authoritarianism necessary? Why can't god's love just cover all the sins? Why can't our love for other people cover their sins?

What is love any way in this context? It appears to consist of hospitality, serving others, and "administering god's grace in its various forms." Grace again. Also, anyone who speaks should speak as though they are saying the words of god. That's quite a proposition. How does one speak as though they are god? If anyone serves, they should do it with the strength god provides, which happens to be the same strength nature provides. Because of this, in some unfathomable way, god will be mysteriously come to be praised. To prove that, the author ends this passage praising god. Amen.

The next verse (4:12) is almost like the start of another letter and begins with "dear friends." The reader is not to be surprised at the painful trial they are suffering. It is not strange, under the circumstances. Instead they should rejoice that they get to participate in suffering like Jesus. That means they will be overjoyed when his "glory" is revealed. I feel sorry for the readers. Their suffering never amounted to anything, no joy or glory. Nevertheless, the author tells them they are blessed to be insulted for christ.

If they are going to suffer, it should not be as murderers, thieves, criminals, or even meddlers. (Meddlers...that's a weird addition.) Those things are shameful, but suffering as a christian is praiseworthy. Judgement begins with the family of god. And if it begins with them, what will be the outcome of those who do not obey. If they think they've got it bad, just think of what's waiting for the nonbelievers.

The author supposedly quotes Proverbs 11:31, "If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly sinner?" Except this is what Proverb 11:31 actually says, " If the righteous receive their due on earth, how much more the ungodly sinner." Clearly there are two very different implications. One suggests eternal reward and punishment the other is obviously earthly. Woe to him who not only quote mines but changes the text to suit his own purposes!

So, "those who suffer according according  to god's will (because all suffering is god's will) should commit themselves to their faithful creator and continue to good." Suffering appears to be their lot in life, no matter what.

Till next time.

Grace, part two

For your reading, I present the Wikipeda article on Grace in Christianity. The church of christ stance would be considered arminian.

In protestant christianity, grace is often defined as unmerited favor. You get something good from god that you did not earn. Even more than that, you get something good that you didn't deserve. The implication being that you actually deserved something bad, but you got something good instead. What do you deserve? Condemnation. Death and destruction. No ifs ands or buts.

God's gracious act to the human race was supposed to be sending Jesus to die in your place, even though he didn't deserve to die, you did. You filthy trash. Wait a minute, that's quite offensive.  I wouldn't want to be called filthy trash even if it were true. Do unto others. Tell you what I'm going to do. I'm going to spread a little of god's grace around and I'm not going to verbally condemn you, even if I believe you probably are going to hell. I'm going to be gracious because I feel sorry for you. There is no point in making you experience hell any sooner than necessary. We would be in the same sinking boat if I hadn't let Jesus save me.  "But for the grace of god, there go I." These kinds of christians are often labelled "liberal."

There are some christians who don't want to be gracious. They want to call a spade a spade and an unsaved sinner an unsaved sinner. They want to prophetically call out the sins that the people are committing. They fear for your immortal soul. So they give you a little taste of coming fire and brimstone, hoping you will learn to fear for your own soul, so they won't have to. No pain no gain. These are the people that the gracious christians call "legalistic."

What does Jesus have to say about grace in the gospels?  Nothing. Zip. Nada. I find that quite odd. However, the letters ascribed to Paul have a whopping 89 instances of the usage of the word grace.
The word grace  occurs in the gospels four times. This is the same exact greek word that Paul uses.
*Luke 2:40- (speaking of the child Jesus) "he was filled with wisdom and the grace of god was upon him." This is confusing. Would a christian say even Jesus did not merit gods favor? Are there different kinds of god's grace?
*John 1:14 (speaking of Jesus) "The word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only who came from the father, full of grace and truth." Does it make sense here to call grace unmerited favor? Clearly it means something else, but what? Does it mean grace is a quantity of unmerited favor that Jesus can dispense?
*John 1:16 &17(speaking of Jesus). "From the fullness of his grace we have all received one blessing after another. For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." But what is grace? If Jesus gave/gives grace, how come he never talked about grace in the only accounts of his words and life?

Here is my take on christian grace: The greek word used in the New Testament is charis. This is defined as a blessing, favor, or kindness. It is where we get our word charity from. There is no implication of being undeserving in the original word at all. In the Luke passage, we might just say god blessed Jesus. (Though what constitutes a blessing isn't exactly clear either) However, christianity has taken Paul's statements in his letters, that we don't work for or earn god's grace through merit, and extended them to mean that noone deserves god's grace, which they have equated with salvation and eternal life. They have equated merit with deserving. Therefore, since noone can do anything to merit god's favor, christianity says everyone who receives salvation is undeserving. In Romans 1:18-32 there are those who are even more undeserving than others. They don't get salvation. According to this passage, they merit death. If you don't fall on the list of the condemned, you qualify for salvation, but don't forget you didn't earn it.

It doesn't seem right to me that you can earn hell but not earn heaven.

What is Grace? Part one.

Grace is a word that is often bandied about in Christianity today. It irritates the heck out of me. Why? Because there is no concrete definition. It is feel-good christianese. Whole books could be written about the various theological meanings of grace. Here is dictionary.com's definition of grace: ( link) Read every definition. In my mind, most of it is just word salad. Almost every definition of grace has a clearer synonym. Notice that grace is not something that can be pinned down. It is ephemeral, a purely subjective and invisible quality. Its presence is guessed at by 1. how well a person does life, and/or 2. how well life treats or has treated them, 3. their unearned, desireable qualities and advantages.

Wikipedia has a few explanations of the theology of grace. First look at what it says about Divine Grace. If you are more enlightened than you were a moment ago, I congratulate you. Each paragraph in that article differed on its explanation of what grace actually is. Sometimes even one sentence to the next differs in the explanation of grace.  Unsurprisingly, Catholics and Protestants disagree on the definition.

Very surprisingly, someone has quoted Bill Gothard's definition of grace in the Wikipedia article. Of all the quotable christians in the world and throughout history, in the nonexistent god's name, WHY? Many Christians claim grace to be the opposite of legalism. Mr. Gothard's organization has promoted some of the most virulent teachings of christian legalism over the last few decades.

Let's look at the defining first paragraph of the Wikipedia article. First, grace is said to be "the divine influence which operates in humans to regenerate and sanctify, to inspire virtuous impulses, and to impart strength to resist trial and endure temptation." To boil it down, grace is that quality that keeps some people from acting like jerks when everyone around them is. This is said to have a divine source. Baloney. Some people have been lucky enough to get the right combination of genes, family background, and life circumstances, to engender patience, tolerance, and mercy in their attitudes. They are said to be "gracious." Other people learn those qualities through experience. Other people deliberately set out to cultivate those qualities in themselves. No gods required.

The second part of Wikipedia's definition  of grace is "an individual virtue or excellence of divine origin." This could refer to innate desireable personality traits, unique talents, or  personal beauty, in an individual.  A person who has these things is often considered favored by god, or the gods. These "graces"  are bestowed upon them from on high. They didn't do anything to deserve them, they are arbitrary divine gifts. People thus favored could still be jerks. Do you think the idea that beautiful, talented, or wealthy people are favored by god/the gods has died out? It's been around a long time. Just read about the ancient minor goddesses called the graces. Some of the ancient graces include: splendor, mirth, good cheer, blossoms, happiness, banquet, night festivities, sound, light, growth, leader, persuasion, hallucination (? Maybe that means dreams and visions) and beauty. It appears that the visual representation of the graces has evolved into one of three naked young women.

Scroll down the Wikipedia article on Divine Grace till you get to the section on grace in scripture. There you will see that the New Testament word in Greek is Karis. It is generally translated as graciousness of manner or act. The Old Testament Hebrew word is chen. That is defined as favor, charm, and the moral quality of kindness.

Do we know exactly what grace is yet? At the moment, It seems safe to say that grace is an unmeasurable quality that is desirable but not universally available. So, there must be reasons some people have got it and others don't,  right? Well, someone somewhere decided that that certain something must be a gift from a god or gods.

More to come.

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