Saturday 26 March 2011

Part IV - John

God is Love


John was the last apostle who wrote a Gospel and some epistles. What he wrote is remarkable, deserving careful study and consideration. Amongst the apostles, John stands out for a number of reasons – he was referred to as "the one whom Jesus loved" [1] - he was the youngest - the only apostle present at the crucifixion and the one to whom Jesus entrusted his mother’s care.

John had been very close to Jesus and an eyewitness of the events surrounding his earthly life, but in his Gospel he didn’t just tell the story of what had happened, as the others had done. He told it differently, and added many profound realizations which had matured with him in time. He omitted many of the events already recounted in the other Gospels, and added others. There is the impression, when reading John’s gospel, that he wrote to complete, to add what others had omitted and to explain what they hadn’t yet understood.

Often referred to as the theologian par excellence, John lived a few decades longer than his fellow apostles. With time he matured that understanding of the Word made flesh, of the nature and origin of Jesus and became the personification of what the master had spoken: "I still have many things to tell you, but are not within your reach for now, but when He, the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth "[2]. As already noted, the disciples didn’t fully understand Jesus while he was with them. Many things they only understood after his death and resurrection, and others still later. It seems as if John, by virtue of his longer life, was able to mature an even deeper and fuller understanding of the nature and mission of Jesus.

With the passing away of the apostles and other eye-witnesses, some strange "new gospels" had also begun to surface. Untrue or simply distorted, we now call these accounts or collections of sayings as apocryphal. John dedicated part of its first epistle to refuting one such fallacy. An idea had begun to circulate that Jesus had not "come in the flesh" [3], that he had not become human but had remained essentially spirit, like a ghost in some sort of visible form, but not like human flesh. As with this one, John also had the task of rejecting some of the first Christian forgeries.

His most important work, however, was to confirm, deepen and complete what Jesus had described as a progressive revelation of himself. He did this beautifully and in his writings he gave us more truth about the nature of Jesus and God than anyone else before him. Simply think of these words: "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. And the Word was made flesh. As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God. You must be born again. Born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting. God is love "[4].

John’s writings went beyond recounting simple historical events; they led to the very origins of time, to the One who planned it all, "before Abraham was, I am '[5]. In the words of Jesus, which he quoted more than anyone else, he gave us an unparalleled view into the mind and heart of God.

God is Love 
In his first epistle, John tells us what no one else had yet understood so clearly, that God is essentially love – that He loved us so much that He gave his son for us, to bear our sins and make us justified by faith. This priceless gift of God’s grace was already spoken of by Paul, but John revealed it to its greater extent. In simple but unmistakable words John said:" Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loves is born of God, and knows God. He that loves not knows not God, because God is love. And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwells in love dwells in God, and God in him" [6].

Already implied in the Old Testament, this law of Love was later emphasized by Jesus: "Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting him, and saying, “Master, which is the great commandment in the law?” Jesus said unto him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, you shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets” [7]. The “law” was the books of Moses containing the commandments and the “prophets” were the prophetic books. In practice Jesus was saying that the entire Bible known until then, could be summed up in two simple rules, love God and love others. Paul also devoted an entire section of his first epistle to the Corinthians to this very theme, and it is in chapter 13. In the previous chapters he had spoken of the gifts of the Holy Spirit and the corresponding roles that these imparted to believers. Then he concluded in that 13th chapter saying that all skills and charismas imparted by the Holy Spirit, were nothing if there was no love.

1 Corinthians 13
If I speak in the tongues of humans and angels but have no love, I have become a reverberating gong or a clashing cymbal.  If I have the gift of prophecy and can understand all secrets and every form of knowledge, and if I have absolute faith so as to move mountains but have no love, I am nothing. Even if I give away all that I have and surrender my body so that I may boast * but have no love, I get nothing out of it. Love is always patient, Love is always kind, Love is never envious or vaunted up with pride.  Nor is she conceited, and never is she rude, never does she think of self or ever get annoyed. She never is resentful, is never glad with sin, but always glad to side with truth, whenever the truth should win. She bears up under everything, believes the best in all, there is no limit to her hope, and never will she fall. Love never fails. Now if there are prophecies, they will be done away with. If there are tongues, they will cease. If there is knowledge, it will be done away with. For what we know is incomplete and what we prophesy is incomplete. But when what is complete comes, then what is incomplete will be done away with. When I was a child, I spoke like a child, thought like a child, and reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I gave up my childish ways. Now we see only a blurred reflection in a mirror, but then we will see face to face. Now what I know is incomplete, but then I will know fully, even as I have been fully known. Right now three things remain: faith, hope, and love. But the greatest of these is love.

I lack space and time to list all other scriptures pointing to a God of love and to a new covenant in which the new law is "love", but I’ll quote one of my favorites, "Love does no wrong to his neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law (commandments) [8].

The apostle Paul explained how the Old Testament and Mosaic Law had fulfilled the role of a "guardian" [9]. Its rules, prohibitions and consequences for wrongdoing had been for the purpose of keeping people from hurting each other and to enforce acceptable standards of behavior. He explained how the law had been added because of transgression [10], because of a lack of love in mankind, but how it hadn’t been the original intent of God, let alone the final one. It was simply a passage, as a guardian is for a child, until in Christ, man comes to maturity. About this Paul wrote more specifically: "When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things" [11]. The childish things he was speaking of were these exterior more visible aspects of religion, be they commandments, rituals or showy charismatic gifts, and concluded with what he felt were the real solid elements denoting maturity: "three things last: faith, hope, love, but the greatest of these is love" [12]. And so, that which was merely implied and almost cryptic in the Old Testament Law, was later revealed by Jesus, further expounded on by Paul and finally completed by John. Gradually, and with increasing clarity, the Holy Spirit revealed through these that love is the intent, substance and final goal of the relationship between man and God. As Christians, that’s what we should aim for, and it’s what denotes the passing of our spiritual childhood, the transition from external piety to a genuine spiritual maturity.

Growing in love
It is not within us, however, to constantly aim towards growth and maturity, which we cannot produce by our own efforts anyway. So we often settle for the more childish and visible aspects of our faith journey and do not reach for more, for what God actually give us. Instead we accept being tied to the past, to a religion that is still made of illustrative objects and symbolic ceremonies, and do not take hold of enduring spiritual realities. Finding some sense of the sacred in religion, with its buildings, rituals and customs, we settle for it and do not attempt to go past it, to discover a living relationship with God, without the crutches of religion. When a Samaritan woman, of a different faith, asked Jesus which was the right place and way to worship God, he told her " Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father… but the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeks such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth" [13]. By these words Jesus indicated that neither Jerusalem, a local sanctuary nor any other external religious function, could affect true spiritual communion with God.

So simple, deep and clear and yet, for a lack of desire for this type of relationship with God, we are prone to substitutes, exteriorities, counterfeits and toys that look like the real thing. Instead of God we choose the sacred, instead of loving God and others, we hide behind religion, in the illusion of spirituality that it creates for us. Nonetheless, God is a God of love, actually, He is love itself, and as such is not angry with those of us who are still children and play at religion. God loves us so much that He accepts us at all stages of our lives, knowing that we are destined to mature, and guides us through those life experiences that will help us to move forward.

The apostle Paul explained: "for now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known" [14]. So even if we were to always make forward progress in our relationship with God, it is only when we shall see Him face to face that it will all be clear. In the meantime, as creatures that need to live, grow and mature, we are each destined to walk at our own pace and to see whatever each stage of our growth affords us to see.

The Great Criteria
God does not judge us by some theological criteria, knowledge, ability, or anything of the kind, but by the love we give, and that’s why he said that “This is how everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another - the last shall be first - whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted” [15]. Love is humility and true humility is love. They are one and the same and we cannot love without humility, nor be truly humble without love. If we really wish to grow in our faith journey, to be more in tune with Him, then we must grow in love and humility. We must strive for this, clothe ourselves in it, embrace it and refuse to other way… the judging and pointing of the finger. We need to let God be God and not try to take His place, instead, we must look at ourselves and judge all that we do by the standpoint of love. This is our part and the way of the New Testament. We will never fully succeed, for we are human and fallible beings, but our failings will keep us humble and merciful with others, helping us to avoid the pride that comes from religious effort. But love is the way to walk. Love is all the religion that’s needed. It’s our purpose because it is where we came from and where we are heading. Love is the nature and light of God.

The light of God
Love, however, must not be confused with moral relativism and ethical subjectivism. Being nonjudgmental, tolerant and accepting of differences doesn’t annul the fact that absolute truths do exist, which implies judgment. Just as love is the light of God, the absence of it equals darkness and all its manifestations. It says, in fact: "Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness" [16]. We cannot, however, fight darkness with darkness. Darkness is only defeated by light because darkness is merely an absence of it. This is why Jesus, hanging on the cross, did not breathe out vengeance and resentment against those who unjustly judged him, but said instead: "Father forgive them for they know not what they do" [17]. That’s why he had also taught "Love your enemies. Do good to those who hate you. Bless those who curse you, and pray for those who insult you. If someone strikes you on the cheek, offer him the other one as well, and if someone takes your coat, don't keep back your shirt, either. Keep on giving to everyone who asks you for something, and if anyone takes what is yours, do not insist on getting it back. Whatever you want people to do for you, do the same for them. “If you love those who love you, what thanks do you deserve? Why, even sinners love those who love them. If you do good to those who do good to you, what thanks do you deserve? Even sinners do that. If you lend to those from whom you expect to get something back, what thanks do you deserve? Even sinners lend to sinners to get back what they lend. Rather, love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them, expecting nothing in return. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, for he is kind to ungrateful and evil people. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful. Stop judging, and you will never be judged. Stop condemning, and you will never be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you, a large quantity, pressed together, shaken down, and running over will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use, you will be measured” [18].

This was the light that Jesus lit and it is what lights the way of every Christian. "By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love for one another" [19]. The God that Jesus and the apostles showed us is Love. May the God of love then give us strength to represent Him to men as He is and not to our limited image. A God who judges, vindictive and austere is much easier to emulate. A tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye is to most of us an instinctively natural response. Even the disciples reacted this way when Jesus "sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village … and they did not receive him… and when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did?  But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them” [20]. Thankfully God’s love is not like ours, but is unconditional: "But God demonstrates his love for us by the fact that Christ died for us while we were still sinners" [21].

May the light of God's love then shine in our hearts and free us from the chains of pride and human religiosity, what we often call light, but is not. May His light shine until the perfect day, when we will be in perfect communion with Him and one another.

This ends our study of the origins and purpose of Christianity. The first epistle of John it is a fitting conclusion for it and I invite you to read it fully and meditate upon it. Our study of the Bible, however, does not end here. We haven’t yet approached the Old Testament, with the story of creation, the fall of man and God’s plan of redemption, which are necessary elements for reaching a fuller understanding of God’s intents. The Gospels, however, will always remain central for each of us who have chosen to be Christians, so I wish you a profitable studying of the first epistle of John, and a continued review of the Gospels.

1. John 13: 23  20: 2  21: 7,20
2. John 16: 12,13
3. 1st John 4: 2
4. John 1,2,3 – 1st John 4: 8,16
5. John 8, 58
6. 1st John 4: 7,8,16
7. Matthew 22: 35 to 40
8. Romans 13: 10
9.  Galatians 3: 24,25
10. Galatians 3: 19
11. 1st Corinthians 13: 11
12. 1st Corinthians 13: 13
13. John 4: 21 to 24
14. 1st Corinthians 13: 12
15. John 13: 35 Matthew 23: 12
16. Isaiah 5: 20
17. Luke 23: 34
18. Luke 6: 27 to 38
19. John 13: 35
20. Luke 9: 52 to 56
21. Romans 5: 8

Saturday 19 March 2011

Which Christianity?

Appendix 1 - Which Christianity?

Some might be wondering from which branch of Christianity, or theological current, this script derives from. To answer this question it is necessary to step back a moment and look at the overall landscape of Christian institutions, their history and theology. It can only be a brief, concise view, not an exhaustive study on the matter, but I hope that it will be sufficient to frame my answer and satisfy the legitimate curiosity of the reader.

About one third of the world population defines itself Christian. Generally speaking, these two billion people are divided into three major groups, Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants. Some prefer subdividing into five groups, instead of three, but for the sake of brevity and to avoid entering into endless hair-splitting differentiations, we will stick to the three larger ones.

Orthodoxy
The Orthodox Churches are traditionally the older ones and adhere to unchanging traditions. They usually take pride in that fact and view themselves as keepers of the original tradition that was handed down by the apostles. In that view, they perceive most other forms of Christianity as having more or less departed from the true Christianity. Having dealt with various heresies in the early centuries of Christianity, they have given much importance to tradition as a stabilizing factor and a mark of true faith. In their view the Bible is important but insufficient by itself and can only be interpreted correctly when compared to the tradition that was given by the apostles.

Catholicism
The Catholic Churches also have a tradition, but a different one. Their Apostolic tradition is the Primacy of Peter, a sort of apostolic lineage coming down to us through the papacy. They see in the popes the continuation of a spiritual mandate given by Jesus to Peter. As such the popes have the power to introduce new revelations, dogmas and a maturation/modification of the ritual traditions. This state of affairs has provided the stabilizing effect of tradition, while allowing also maturation and innovation. The Bible is the essential original revelation, but the proper understanding of it is ensured by apostolic continuity as represented in the Pope and his Magisterium.

Protestantism
The Reformation, or Protestantism, doesn’t see much value in tradition and defers to the Bible as the sole authority. Their motto is "sola scriptura", meaning “only the written word”. In their view the Bible is the absolute word of God and all that is needed to determine the way of Christianity. Their lack of a common tradition has fostered greater individualism and fragmentation into different churches that adhere to various interpretations of Bible scripture. This doesn’t mean that there are no traditions within their institutions, as it is impossible to build a continuing one without them, but rather than structural or ritual ones, it is the case of interpretive traditions, the particular significance which the individual church attributes to Bible scripture.

From these three systems spring forth countless others. Regardless of which church, or no church, one belongs to, most Christian will identify with one of the three, which often combines also with a critical view of the other two. Sadly, it is no different from the polarization that happens, for example, between the political right and left, where issues are rarely valued in their own merit, but become affected by age-old suspicion running between opposing factions. On the bright side it is also true that much progress has been made in recent years to overcome prejudice and ancient animosity. There is, in fact, much beauty within all three systems, as well as much that could be overcome, and though some qualitative judgment could be made on each, I am neither qualified, nor wishing to try. Furthermore, the multiple aspects of worldwide Christianity are not the aim of this study, but the study of the Bible is, which I hope to place within anyone’s reach. I wished, however, to touch on it lightly in order to make this one point - that there is diversity within Christianity, even deep diversity, but it is a non issue when it comes to determining individual Christianity. Real Christianity is a relationship with God and a lifestyle, and this can be found within any of the three systems, as well as without. Furthermore, I am also convinced that most differences were determined by cultural, political and other factors that had little to do with real faith. Christianity does, in fact, still drags along an unbearable burden of accumulated rubble from the wars and feuds of the past. Unfortunately it is this unnecessary load that perpetrates prejudice and ill feeling amongst many Christians.

It is not the dress that makes a monk
In other words, you may be wearing a monk’s habit but that alone won’t make you one. It’s an ancient Italian proverb describing how outward religious appearance doesn’t necessarily signify inner faith. By the same token it isn’t adherence to a religious order or system that determines one’s Christianity, but it’s their personal relationship to Christ that does. I therefore invite the reader to rise above the partisan and culturally inherited prejudices associated with the three main systems of Christianity. Please desist from pigeonholing what you read here, or in the bible, within one of them. I encourage you, instead, to think for yourself and begin this journey of discovery of the Bible using the method I have proposed, but then letting God’s Words and Spirit lead you to a personal, direct relationship with Himself. My sole intention is to provide some keys which will enable anyone using them to unlock and understand what they read – tools that can help overcome the apparent contradictions and old prejudices, so that the reader can discover, not an ancient literary work, but a living God.

To adhere or not to a particular church is a personal prerogative and does not, in my view, determine the degree of closeness to Christ, which cannot be judged by external factors. Since there is, however, both the benefit as well as the need to share one’s faith with others, I think it is also a matter of personal choice with whom to associate for this purpose. To be considered is the availability and proximity of a church, or other Christian group in the country where one resides. Obviously there are more choices in some places than in others, but thankfully it is always possible to find someone with whom to share the faith journey. I am convinced that God is able to lead each one to the situation that is most suitable for them.

However, I repeat, it is neither the church nor the group that makes a Christian, but the personal choice to live by Jesus’ teachings. All religious institutions have faults and virtues and their differences are largely based on human aspects, rather than Christian. It is, therefore, not excessively important which church one belongs to, as long as its foundation is in Christ. Being a Christian is somewhat of an intimate and personal affair, which cannot be overly dependent on adherence to a particular institution. If you are Christian, however, you could be a valuable contribution to any church, and receive in return, but beware not to equate Christianity with adherence. Just like entering a mechanic workshop doesn’t make us mechanics, neither does entering a church makes us Christians.

Tuesday 8 March 2011

Part III - The Epistles of Paul

From the Gospels we learned what Jesus was like, then in the Book of Acts we saw the Holy Spirit coming into the scene and how the first Christians put Jesus’ teachings into practice. We also read about some difficulties they had in separating from their former religion, and about the ensuing split between Paul and the mother church in Jerusalem, the reasons of which became a recurring theme in Paul’s Epistles. Although this very issue and the whole of Paul’s writings appear rather complex, please bear with me and you will see that by employing a few simple tools, some interpretative notions, it will all become rather simple and understandable.

The Law
Paul wrote extensively about “the law”, but what he was referring to was substantially different from what we understand by “law” today. Paul was referring to the Mosaic Law, the so called commandments, which were not merely ten, but hundreds, and regulated life to the smallest details. It had been the legal system of the Israelite nation since the days of Moses, and to get an idea of what it might have been like, I had drawn a comparison to a present day state ruled by Sharia, or Islamic law. It might not be the best association but it does provide a semblance of the type of culture and environment into which Christianity was born. Let us take, for example, the story of the woman caught on adultery who was brought to Jesus for judgment. According to the law she was supposed to be stoned to death, but Jesus knew they had brought her to him so that they could find something to accuse him of. They had often heard him preach a ethic that went contrary to that of the Mosaic Law. They had heard him preach mercy and forgiveness, while the law taught “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth”.  They were using this woman’s case to try and force him into openly disagreeing with the Mosaic Law, so that they could declare him an enemy of their system and a false prophet. Jesus did not answer for a while and wrote on the ground, then upon their insistence He gave them the famous answer "He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her", and they all left. It was truly a divine answer, because he couldn’t have openly opposed the law without serious consequences. The only way out for him and that poor woman, who though a sinner did not deserve to die, was for him to consent to the law, while adding a condition which none of her accusers could measure up to. By this, Jesus did three main things; he saved the woman, himself, and exposed the hypocrisy of those who claimed to be followers of the law. We will study the reasons for the Mosaic Law when we delve into the Old Testament, but here we will see why Paul taught that Jesus had introduced a new Law of Love, which did away with the old one. In any case, to further explain the effects of the law in the socio-climate of that time let us simply consider that the infraction of most of the first Ten Commandments carried the death penalty as a consequence. Even Jesus, on the strength of such a commandment, was eventually condemned to death for blasphemy.

Reform or Revolution?
As we saw in the Book of Acts, the first Christians were all Jews, born and raised under the Mosaic Law. For most of them Christianity represented only a reformation, a softening of the Law with more love and mercy. Paul, instead, fought tenaciously to demonstrate that the old system, based on the Mosaic Law, had been completely superseded by Christ. He used the law and the Old Testament scriptures (the only Bible known at that time) to demonstrate that Jesus was the fulfillment and conclusion of the same. According to Paul, Jesus had closed the Old Testament and had begun a New One. The Old One, however, was until then the only recognized Bible available for anyone believing in the God of Abraham, including Christians. It had been in circulation for centuries, while the New Testament was still unwritten and unknown. Therefore Paul, like a lawyer in a courtroom, insistently used the Old One (often referred to as “the law” because the five books of Moses containing the law were the basis of it), to present his case for a New Testament. Eventually Paul’s Epistles, with his argumentation for a New Testament became the very text of it.

Paul also used the Old Testament scriptures to counter the attempts of the Jerusalem church to Judaize (bring under the Mosaic Law) those Christians of pagan origins. The most classic example is found in the Epistle to the Galatians, which tells of some envoys sent by James, Bishop of Jerusalem, to Judaize the people of Galatia, who had been converted by Paul to Christianity. Peter also became involved with this, at first supporting Paul, but then doing an about-face for fear of these emissaries from Jerusalem. Paul felt betrayed by Peter’s hypocrisy and rebuked him openly.

God’s people are never perfect
The Bible never hides the weaknesses of his men and talks openly about their mistakes. This allows us to give credit to whom credit is due, which is God, and to see God’s work in spite of the frailty of his human tools. Peter was such a tool and his weakness highlighted the power of God working through him. Also Paul had flaws and weaknesses and it is helpful for us to identify them, so that we can recognize the difference between a personal opinion of his, and a teaching inspired by God. The reason why his epistles became the greater part of the Biblical canon was due to their divine inspiration but, unavoidably, there are also some human aspects.

Why God chose Paul
As by reading the gospels we saw what Jesus was like, by reading the epistles we shall see what Paul was like, his education, character, strength, as well as his weaknesses and inconsistencies. As the gospels did not conceal the weakness of Peter and the other disciples, neither will the Epistles hide those of Paul’s. All the same, the Epistles are the greatest proof of the reasons why God chose Paul. And why did He?

Paul was what none of the others were. He came from Tarsus, an influential center of Greek culture, and was educated in Jerusalem in the rabbinical school of Gamaliel. Paul was a Pharisee and part of that ideological current which first persecuted and killed Jesus, and then Stephen. To them Jesus was a false prophet, a threat to the integrity of their religion and culture, centered on the Mosaic Law. Paul was a legalist and ready to act in order to eradicate the new Christian heresy. He was the image of the crusader, the inquisitor, the protector of the true faith and tradition of the fathers.

If we were to describe Paul in just one word it would be "zeal". There were no half-measures with him, and that which was worth living for; it was also worth dying for. That intensity of emotions and ideals that first drove him to hunt and persecute the Christians, drove him after to proclaim the name of Jesus.

By comparison, the rest of the apostles, maybe with the exception of Matthew, were simple and unlearned men. God did use them greatly, but he needed Paul to develop and write the first Christian theology and to lead Christianity beyond the confines of Judaism. God, knowing that the main obstacle to overcome was the old religion, chose a rabbi from the fundamentalist group of the Pharisees, so that once converted he could understand the breadth and depth of the change that had come about with Christ’s sacrifice. Paul, devoted most of his epistles to explaining this, using the Mosaic Law and the Old Covenant as a means to prove their own demise. This is what caused him endless persecution by his own people, who accused him of being "the man who teaches all everywhere against the people and the Law and this place (temple)" [1].

Not everyone understood him, not even his teammates, and even Peter wrote of him "in all his letters… are some things hard to be understood"[2]. God, however, had chosen and prepared him for the job and after some time his ideas were finally vindicated and recognized. In order for Christianity to survive and fulfill its universal mission, it needed to become its own entity and break away from the old system. Paul became God’s instrument to lead Christianity out of its cultural nest of the Mosaic Law, and to bring it to adulthood, into the freedom of the New Covenant.

Jesus had been the author of that New Covenant and had signed it with his own blood. His disciples, however, did not immediately understand this, but discovered it gradually. It was impossible for them to comprehend right away all that He was and the magnitude of the change He was bringing about. Even if they had understood it, the Israelite culture in which they were born, was just too strong an obstacle for such simple fishermen to effectively challenge it. In the first chapters of the Book of Acts, we saw that under the impetus of the Holy Spirit, they did actually make some outstanding strides forward. But, as in trench warfare, they soon found themselves stuck in Jerusalem, the temple, the synagogues, and so tied to the old ways that they could go no further. To break the impasse God had prepared Paul, whom he led out of Jerusalem into other countries, from which he then led the young Christian movement towards its global expansion.

Human aspects of Paul
We’ve alluded to some inconsistencies in Paul and indeed there were. His personality, as with all of God’s people, did not always reflect that of the master, and his reactions to certain situations were sometimes contrary to those of Jesus. These shortcomings, though minimal by comparison to the beauty of his teachings, are worth noting in order to avoid getting confused on some matters. One may ask, in view of this, how we can know when something taught by Paul is actually inspired by God and when, instead, it is simply a matter of personal opinion. If we apply the very principle which we’ve established from the beginning, there will be no difficulty in knowing the difference. We simply need to ask what Jesus would have done, or said, if he had been in the same situation. If there is a marked difference, then we know who’s right. It’s very simple… Jesus becomes the criterion, and not our subjective judgment. I will give some examples:

Women
If we look at the historical context of that period, we discover a very male-dominated society in which women were rarely given any significant roles outside of the home. By contrast, the Gospels tell us of a good number of women near and around Jesus. There were women who followed him, others who supported him, there was Mary Magdalene, who accompanied him till the end, there was the one of ill repute who washed his feet with tears, then the adulteress whom he saved from stoning, the sisters Mary and Martha, the Samaritan woman at the well, the other with the incurable flow, who touched him and was healed, not to mention of his own mother, Mary, and more. The women around Jesus were as visible as the men, and that put him in stark contrast with the reality of that time. Even his birth, with God choosing a young unmarried girl to conceive His son, was scandalous. According to their laws and tradition, Mary didn’t deserve admiration but lapidating. Even in today’s world it would be fairly shocking, especially considering the young age of Mary, about 14, but imagine what kind of reaction it would have caused to see an unmarried pregnant girl in that period and society. Because the story of Mary and Joseph and baby Jesus has become part of our Christian culture, it hardly raises a brow, but at that time it was extremely embarrassing and counter-current. It is further evidence that the Gospels weren’t invented to create an attractive Christian myth, in which case the authors would have certainly avoided such embarrassing parts. Only someone telling the truth would have told such potentially damaging aspects of Jesus’ life and origins.

Not only the Gospel writers, but Paul also, challenged the traditional view on women when he declared: "there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" [3]. He also spoke of women who played important roles in the church, who were assisting him, who prophesied, who housed churches in their homes (in the Epistles the word "church" did not refer to a building, nor to a religious institution, but to groups of believers who gathered together, usually in someone's house).

Nonetheless, Paul derived from a cultural milieu in which women were different and inferior to man and, from time to time, his intrinsic cultural baggage did resurface in his comments and instructions. Thankfully, when writing on these things, he sometimes prefaced his comments with “I speak this by permission, not of commandment “ or “I speak, not the Lord” [4], as if he was sensing an insufficient approval of is personal views. Furthermore he was also the only unmarried apostles, as he himself indicated, "Do we not have authority to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brothers of the Lord do, and Peter? [5]. His own celibacy, his high recommendation for such a lifestyle, his idea that marriage was “ok” but not the best, and his general view on women, did also denote a different kind of influence in his life. It was not the typical Hebrew male mentality that wished to exert authority over women but looked upon marriage, sexuality and having children as Godly virtues. The celibacy ideas, which he expounded with a mixture of doubt and conviction, were common instead in those centers of Greek culture, such as Tarsus, where he was raised, and the other northern countries where he lived most of his life. It was part of a Gnostic, dualistic influence that affected many religions and philosophies of that period.

On women, there are therefore some contradictions in Paul, as is even demonstrated by his injunction to “Let your women be silent in the churches; for it is not permitted to them to speak, but to be in subjection, as the Law also says” [6]. It contradicted what he himself had just said about the equality of the sexes, as well as what Peter had said on Pentecost, that “ your sons and your daughters shall prophecy” [7], which would be impossible to do if the daughters are to keep silence. Obviously, this rule of Paul is disregarded by most Christians.

In any case it is not necessary to list all of Paul’s comments about women, as you will inevitably come across them while reading his epistles. Some men might not mind them, while some women could find them offensive. In most cases, however, they will appear outdated. Please don’t allow this to make you doubt the wonderful work and tremendous teachings of Paul. Just consider the time in which Paul lived, what the prevailing attitudes about women and slavery were then, and you will see that he was heading towards their liberation. It may not appear so, when compared with today's reality, but I'm sure that you will forgive Paul for being simply the fruit of his time. If you study carefully that which was before him and that which came after, you will see the very hand of God using Paul to free Christianity from the shackles of the past and push in the right direction.


Note: The life and work of Paul was in its time a crucial step in the fulfilling of God’s plan for Christianity, the next stage in a journey that still continues today. Form creation to the grand finale of God, there is in fact a progressive revelation taking place, one that involves a gradual maturation and deepening of man’s understanding and relationship with God. This, according to Paul and John, will culminate with the second coming of Christ, and the so-called marriage supper of the lamb, which we will study separately. At the beginning, this progressive revelation manifested itself in various encounters and covenants with promises, such as those that God made with Abraham, Moses, etc.. Paul spoke of these calling them "shadow of things to come" so that "when the fullness of the time came, God sent forth His Son” – “for we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when the perfect thing comes, then that which is in part will be caused to cease” [8]. By this we understand that the relationship between man and God, both individually and collectively, is a reality that changes with time, a journey that has a beginning, as well as an ultimate end.

Justification by faith
Paul refused any compromise with the old law and used the same scriptures which had proclaimed it, to demonstrate its fulfillment, conclusion and demise. He devoted much of Romans, Galatians, Ephesians and Hebrews (though not written by him, it reflects his thinking) to this very theme. According to Paul, there couldn’t be a salvation half by works of obedience to the law, and half by grace, through Christ’s sacrifice. It was either one or the other: " But if by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it is of works, then it is no more of grace; otherwise work is no more work" [9]. Christ’s atonement was sufficient and to offer any other sacrifice was an affront, as if declaring his blood ineffective. Paul attacked this human presumption over and over, and yet, very few Christians really understand at heart what he tried to get across. Even though Paul devoted many arguments to it, the predominant influence of the old Mosaic Law in the cultural legacy of those who wrote the Bible, as well as human nature itself, prevents most from seeing the reality of justification by faith. Our ego, in fact, makes us more prone towards a religion of works (like Cain), rather than grace (as Abel), and so Paul’s words often remains veiled in mystery.

Some inconsistencies in Paul himself may also be responsible for some confusion in this matter. Being a man of strength and of great responsibility towards the churches he had founded, when there appeared some deviance that threatened their harmony and good conduct, Paul became intensely animated with zeal for their welfare. From this zeal sprang some scathing rebukes that ran contrary to his own teachings on justification by grace – or those of Jesus, who did not place any conditions on salvation, but faith.

Likewise, while Jesus was often accused of preferring the company of sinners [10], Paul taught instead to avoid them. While Jesus never uttered harsh words against prostitutes, adulterers, criminals and corrupt tax collectors, Paul, in his zeal for the church, said instead that these were not allowed into the kingdom of God [11]. This is a classic example of how to apply the Gospel and the image of Jesus as a criterion for judging what else we read in the Bible. Obviously, when there is a difference, the Christian will follow Jesus’  example.

Some final words on Paul’s epistles 
I do wish to make it clear that this introduction to Paul's epistles is not meant to be taken as a summary of the same. The contents of the epistles, in fact, are much wider and I have only barely touched a few. My intent was never to summarize, nor even to give some hints of the contents, which must be read straight in the Book, but simply to provide some interpretative tools. I wanted to give an historical context, some explanation of terms and intents and some advanced preparation for what could appear hard to understand or contradicting. These are things I deemed necessary to settle in advance in order to avoid the doubts and confusion that often assail the unprepared reader. Too many begin reading the epistles without prior preparation and then give up as soon as they meet the complicated reasoning of Paul, his apparent contradictions, or chauvinistic attitudes, and desist from continuing in their study. Sadly they loose a very vital part of their Christian training, which can only be obtained through a thorough study of Paul Epistles. With these simple basic notions, I believe that the reader can now begin to study and let the epistles speak for themselves.

A final word. As mentioned above, Paul was a doctor of the Mosaic Law and quoted it repeatedly to expound his reasoning to those who knew it and lived by it. It is not necessary for us to know all the same details in order to understand Paul’s central message, but eventually we will also look at the Old Testament and we’ll understand better some of his reasoning. For the time being, however, it is more important for us to stay grounded on the Gospels, so if reading Paul becomes a bit tiresome, which is likely, then I suggest returning to the Gospel in order to maintain their fundamental priority.

Wishing you all an enlightening reading.

1. Acts 21, 28
2. 2nd Peter 3, 16
3. Galatians 3, 28
4. 1st Corinthians 7: 6 and 12
5. 1st Corinthians 9, 5
6.  1st Corinthians 14:34
7. Acts 2: 17
8. Hebrews 10, 1, Galatians 4, 4 and 1st Corinthians 13, 9:10
9. Romans 11; 6
10. Matthew 9: 10 – 13 and 11: 19
11. 1st Corinthians 6: 9 -10