This is, in most part, a response to a question by Blake:
“What is your opinion on the New Perspective on Paul?”
I am, admittedly, Wrightian (as in NT Wright) in my understanding of Paul and will draw on his understanding of this controversial topic.*
As a follow up to my previous post, there will be a lingering question of “how” the Gospel should be presented and what difference this makes. I do not intend that this is the way how the Gospel should be presented, but rather am trying to make a case as a possibly better way of understanding the Gospel in relation to the Christian life.
Decisionism in “Gospel Presentations”
In popular preaching today, the pressure of making a decision is made through the form of crisis creation, which is arguably a form of psychological manipulation. The form is something along the form of “You are going to hell, Jesus died for your sins, trust/believe in him and you will be saved”. The crisis is sin/hell, the scapegoat is Jesus and the solution is to make a decision.
The Church’s relationship to government has been historically messy. From the approved execution of Jesus by the Roman prefect Pontius Pilate, to the merging of Church and Government that lead to the violent Crusades and to the modern Christian struggle of political involvement in democracy, there have been differing views on what exactly is the “Biblical” relationship of the Church, Christians and government. In this post, I will explore the idea of “The Sword” and things to consider in our modern discussion.
Christoforchuk answered an anonymous question as to what the Gospel is. His response:
Those four books you mentioned are considered the “Gospels”. They outline the ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus. They are not however, the Gospel.
He then goes on to explain the biblical metanarrative of creation-fall-redemption-consummation (none of which I disagree with), but is still missing elements of the “biblical Gospel”. So my rebuttal to Chuk, and for everyone else with this understanding of this “gospel”, is how does your understanding of the Gospel hold up to the Bible? I’d like to make a few points:
Have you ever read the New Testament’s use of Old Testament Scripture and became puzzled that the authors didn’t employ historical-grammatical exegesis on the text, but rather employed what looked like a metaphorical interpretation, mistranslation or an odd application of the Old Testament that disregarded the Old Testament context? (Or is that just me?)
Here are some examples of the issues I am referring to:
- How did Peter turn Psalm 16, a Psalm, when read contextually, about David’s relationship with God, into a Psalm about the resurrection of Christ?[1]
- How did Paul come to the conclusion that Christ was “the Rock” in 1 Cor. 10:4 (referring to Exodus 17:6 and Numbers 20:11)?
- Why do Paul and the Author of Hebrews prooftext a certain part of Psalm 8(v4-6) in 1 Cor. 15:27 and Hebrews 2:6-8 to make a certain Messianic point when the grammatical-historical point of the Psalm is about human domain over the natural world (Psalm 8:7-8)?
- In Matthew 2:14-15, the author quotes a part of Hosea 11:1 (“Out of Egypt I called My Son”) making the text out to be a future/prophetic text. However, the text in its original context is recounting the history of Israel as a reprimand of their disobedience (Hosea 11:1-11).
In my previous post, I looked at two weaknesses of historical-grammatical exegesis. In this post, I want to show how our interpretation methods aren’t always “biblical”.
And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God. (Philippians 1:9-11, ESV)
Within the church, the movement of anti-intellectualism against Christian studies has led to a caricature of theologians/thinkers as not missional; they are “wasting too much time thinking rather than obeying”. This group will lay claim that they have “love”, which is far more important than “knowledge”. To some extent, I will definitely have to agree. Studies, in general, lead one to spend much time in books and hypothetical/abstract discussions. For some, the telos, or end-goal, of Christian studies is to finally decipher the letters of Paul or to figure out the best hermeneutic for apocalyptic literature. I have been guilty of this many times.
At the complete other end, you have the intellectuals who denounce such caricatures as a straw man argument and ridicule others for having “shallow theology” and therefore, a “shallow view of God”.
Many Christians have a distorted view of singleness. If you’re reading this, don’t think you’re disqualified. Why are you single right now? Maybe not because God is “preparing you for your spouse”. Maybe you should consider singleness as a viable option for the rest of your life. Truly heed the words of the Apostle Paul:
I would like you to be free from concern. An unmarried man is concerned about the Lord’s affairs —how he can please the Lord. But a married man is concerned about the affairs of this world—how he can please his wife— and his interests are divided. An unmarried woman or virgin is concerned about the Lord’s affairs: Her aim is to be devoted to the Lord in both body and spirit. But a married woman is concerned about the affairs of this world—how she can please her husband.I am saying this for your own good, not to restrict you, but that you may live in a right way in undivided devotion to the Lord.
-1 Corinthians 7:32-35
Paul isn’t just saying being unmarried is a good thing. He seems to be making the argument that being single is the better thing because your attention and interests are undivided. Don’t think I’m here to bash marriage - it’s human image of Christ’s relationship to the Church - but don’t fail to consider Paul’s words.
Many of you assume that you will be married without even giving singleness later in life as an option. Let me ask you this: Would you sacrifice not being in a marriage to another human being if that was God’s will?
This is one area where I am amazed at some of our Catholic brothers and sisters and their total devotion to the Lord - to live a life married to Christ. A life that is fully devoted to the Lord’s affairs. Don’t fall into the trap of making God your Cosmic Matchmaker.
